by Jan Erik Sigdell

received by Email from Jan Erik Sigdell, on August 16, 2010

Spanish version

Where not otherwise stated, this article is based on the more extensive texts in my German-language book

'Es begann in Babylon'. [1]

                     

                    Content

                    Who is Yahweh?

                    Correspondences with the Bible

                    Plurals in the Bible

                    The Gnostic Christian view of Yahweh

                    The abominable cruelties of Yahweh

                    So who, then, are these Anunnaki?

                    And who, then, is Yahweh?

                    And who is Jesus’ God?

                    A hypothesis about Jesus’ mission and the Christianity

                    And who, then, is Allah?

                    Also other extraterrestrial visits?

                    Are then all “Gods” only extraterrestrials?

                    The Anunnaki want to claim that they are our creators!

                    Are the Anunnaki mentioned in the Bible?

                    REFERENCES

                    APPENDIX - Creation in the Gnostic Christian view

                    Epilog

Return to The Archons

Return to The Anunnaki

Return to Jehovah - Yahweh - YHWH - Adonai

 

 

 

 

 

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. Ancient text and inscription discoveries [2] 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?

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 Sumerian creation story Enûma Elish (I here simply use the notation “Sumerian” generally without dividing texts up in a more exact ethnological manner as “Sumerian”, “Acadian”, “Assyrian”, etc.).

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 has the name Anu).

They separated themselves off from the 2 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.

Back to Contents

 

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 ’arets. 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. But 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.

The conventional and “dogmatically approved” translation of bere’shit is based on be = “in, at” and re’shit = “beginning”. However dictionaries (such as [3]) 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 behare’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 [4].

Such little peculiarities also disappear if we accept the cabbalistic explanation that bere’shiyt actually can be understood as “the first one”.

Back to Contents

 

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 3 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)

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?

 

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?

Back to Contents

 

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 [5].

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. For the Gnostics, the creator of this world wasn’t the true prime creator, but a demiurg, a “craftsman”, a fallen angel, who also has an evil side.

While the real God, the true prime creator (who Jesus calls 4 “father”) is unrestrictedly good, an imperfect demiurg created an imperfect world.

It has been shown that the Gnostics identified this imperfect demiurg-“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 demiurg is a lesser god who wants to be the only one [6].

The text The Apokryphon of John (or The Secret Book of John) states:

    “He is impious in his madness, she who 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” [7].

    (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)?

A similar view was expressed by Marcion (approx. 85-160) [8], the first theologian who made a difference between the God of Love in the New Testament and an evil god of the Old Testament.

Back to Contents

 

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 [9] 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 [10]. 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 with the Hebrews but meet them in battle so that they would be mercilessly destroyed (Josh 11:19.20).

Everyone should die!

Back to Contents

 

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.

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…

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. 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 [11].

My book Es begann in Babylon (“It began in Babylonia”) [1] 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 (i.e., Sitchin doesn’t discuss the “primary murder” of the creator gods Anû und Ti’âmat).

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 [12].

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 [13].

The Anunnaki are there called “lizzies” (as diminutive of “lizards”), since they are reptilian.

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.

Back to Contents

 

And who, then, is Yahweh?

Sitchin in one of his books [14] takes the question up, who Yahweh may be. Is he also an Anunnaki?

He is visibly trying hard to show that Yahweh isn’t an Anunnaki, but the god of the Anunnaki. His argumentation is, however, not very convincing. In my book [1] 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 Anunnaki! 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, Sitchin's 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 [2]!

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 graphite, which rather means “pitch” (bitumen or tar) and generally refers to “inflammable material” [3], 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 [15], 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…

Back to Contents

 

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?

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)

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.

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 [16]?

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…

Back to Contents

 

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.

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”.

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… 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 was later continued by Constantine and others. 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.

Back to Contents

 

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”.

Back to Contents

 

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.

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 mankind. 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).

Back to Contents

 

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.

Back to Contents

 

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!

Back to Contents

 

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.

Back to Contents

 

References

    1. Jan Erik Sigdell: Es begann in Babylon [”It Began in Babylonia“], Holistika, Meckenheim, 2008.
    2. Ein Gott allein? JHWH-Verehrung und biblischer Monotheismus im Kontext der israelitischen und altorientalischen
    Religionsgeschichte [“One God alone? YHWH Worship and Biblical Monotheism in the Context of the Israelite and Ancient Oriental History of Religion”], 13th Colloquium of the Swiss Academy of Spiritual and Social Studies, ed. by Walter Dietrich and Martin A. Klopfenstein, Universitätsverlag, Freiburg (Switzerland), 1994 - several contributions are in English
    3. Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures, transl. by Samuel Prideaux Tregelles, W.M. B. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids MI, no year (preface dated 1846)
    4. Åke Lundqvist: Vildåsnans törst [“The Thirst of the Wild Donkey”], Albert Bonniers, Falun, 2006 (a Swedish book about the Hebrew Bible)
    5. Das neue Taschenbuchlexikon [a German encyclopedia], Bertelsmann, Gütersloh, vol. 12, 1992, “Paulus”, p. 70 and vol. 7, 1992, “Judenchristen”, p. 169
    6. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demiurg
    7. „The Apokryphon of John”, in The Nag Hammadi Library, Harper & Row, New York, no year, pages 98-116. See also http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/apocjn.html and reference 17 below
    8. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion and http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markionismus
    9. A choice of the many cruelties in the Old Testament: Gen 34:25-29; - Ex 12:12; 12:29-30; 15:3; 32:26-28. - Lev 26:7-8; 26:21-22; 26:26-29. - Num 15:32-36; 16:29-35; 16:46-49; 21:3-6; 21:24-25; 21:33-35;31:7-10; 31:14-18; 31:31-32; 31:35 - Deut 2:32-34;. 3:1-6; 7:2-3; 9:3; 13:9-10; 13:14-16; 20:10-17;21:11-14. - Joshua 6:20-25; 8:2; 8:21-25; 8:29; 10:10-11; 10:17-40; 11:6-22. - Judges 1:4-11; 1:17;1:25; 3:29-31; 4:14-16; 7:15-25; 8:17; 9:4-5; 9:43-45; 9:49-52; 11:30-40; 15:15-16; 18:27; 19:22-29;20:2; 20:31-37; 20:41-48. - 1Samuel 5:8-9; 6:19 (wrong translation in many modern texts, it should be 50070 and not 70); 11:6-11; 15:3-9; 15:33; 18:7; 30:17. - 2Samuel 5:8; 5:25; 8:1-5; 10:18; 12:31 (wrong translation in many modern texts, he actually put them under saws, and under harrows of iron, and under axes of iron, and made them pass through the brick kiln); 18:6-7; 24:10-16. - 1Kings 20:28-30. - 2Kings 1:9-14; 2:23-25; 5:25-27; 6:18; 10:13-25; 14:5-7; 15:16; 19:35. - 1Chronicles 20:2-3 (wrong translation in many modern texts, he actually cut them with saws, and with harrows of iron, and with axes. - Psalms 137:9. - Isaiah 13:15-18; 45:5-7; 49:25-26. - Jeremiah 16:3-5. - Lamentations 4:9-11. - Ezekiel 6:12-13; 9:3-6. - Hosea 13:15; 14:1. References to the stated wrong translations, i.e., playing facts down, have been given by Karlheinz Deschner. Luther’s text as well as the English King James’ Bible are here more correct, and who doubts may compare with them.
    10. Karlheinz Deschner: Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums [“Criminal History of Christianity”], vol. 1: Die Frühzeit [“The Early Times”], p. 73-89, Rowohlt, Reinbek, 1989
    11. http://www.sitchin.com - on his books in English: http://www.amazon.com/s?ie=UTF8&rh=i%3Astripbooks%2Cp_27%3AZecharia%20Sitchin&field10author=Zecharia%20Sitchin&page=1

    and in German:
    http://www.amazon.de/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?__mk_de_DE=%C5M%C5Z%D5%D1&url=searchalias%3Daps&field-keywords=sitchin&x=0&y=0
    12. Alexander Heidel: The Babylonian Genesis, 2nd ed., The University of Chicago Press, Chicago IL, 1960
    13. Barbara Marciniak: Bringers of the Dawn, Bear & Company, Santa Fe, 1992, also available for free here: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/pleyades/esp_pleyades_14.htm
    14. Zecharia Sitchin: Divine Encounters, 1995: “Endpaper: God, the Extraterrestrial”, p.347-380
    15. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodom_und_Gomorrha#Interpretationen
    16. Jan Erik Sigdell: Reinkarnation, Christentum und das kirchliche Dogma [“Reincarnation, Christianity and the Dogma of the Church”], Ibera, Vienna, 2001, Chapter 11 and 12, English translation available for free here (European page letter size A4): http://www.christian-reincarnation.com/PDF/ChristRein.pdf and here (US page size “letter”): http://www.christian-reincarnation.com/PDF/ChristRein2.pdf

Back to Contents

 

APPENDIX

Creation in the Gnostic Christian view
Mainly based on a German scholar translation of The Apokryphon of John [17, below].

Every translation is also an interpretation in the way the translator sees it (and, even if unconsciously, wants to see it). On top of that the following text in part is my own interpretation (which I actually feel is a bit inspired, maybe from the Epinoia [v.i.] in me). God, the creator, the “unknown father”, the first one that ever was, creates with his thought. He thinks - and then it is there.

The creative power of his thought is Barbelo, the invisible virginal spirit, the supreme female (bearing = creating) principle. She became the womb of everything (that would come to be). Out of her the Holy Spirit appeared (who the Gnostics regarded as female), the mother of the living. Her collaborator is reason (intelligence).

Out of these two Christ appeared, the divine Autogenes (Emerged-Out-Of-Himself, i.e.: not procreated).

On a lower level, Sophia (Wisdom) appeared as an Emanation of Barbelo. She wanted to create a male entity to appear out of herself, but without approval of the Spirit and without letting her consort know it (consorts are mentioned in connection with entities; hence they are actually androgynous, but either the female or male part comes in appearance). It was her own idea.

She actually had just a thought, but on that level thoughts are creative: you think it, and then it is there.

Therefore this entity came to be in ignorance and was imperfect. Sophia realized this and regretted it, cast the entity away from her and surrounded it with a luminous cloud, so that no one might see it but the Holy Spirit. She called it Yaldabaoth.

Yaldabaoth created further entities, which became his powers. They are called the Archons. He was himself the “first Archon”.

The apokryphon tells about him:

    “…he is ignorant darkness. And when the light had mixed with the darkness, it caused the darkness to shine. And when the darkness had mixed with the light, it darkened the light and it became neither light nor dark, but it became dim… And he is impious in his arrogance which is in him. For he said, ‘I am God and there is no other God beside me,’ for he is ignorant of his strength, the place from which he had come.”

Sophia recognized her mistake when the shining of her light became less and she became darker.

She saw how bad her son was and wept for a long time.

Yaldabaoth said to his Archons:

    “Come, let us create a man according to the image of God and according to our likeness…”

    They created a being after the image of the first complete man (like a model for humans who would come to be) and said: “Let us call him Adam…”

    The being so created wasn’t yet alive. Messengers of God said to Yaldabaoth “’Blow into his face something of your spirit…” He did that ignorantly, because he didn’t himself really know what he was doing. And the being became alive. Adam was luminous and had a better intelligence then the archons, and he was free from wickedness. [So far he wasn’t the physical Adam but an archetype of the human being.]

    Therefore they threw him out on the lower side of matter (on a level within the dark region of Yaldabaoth). God had pity and sent a helper to Adam, the Epinoia (insight through divine inspiration) of light that is called Life [Hebrew: Heva = Eva]. She assists all creation. This Epinoia became hidden in 11 Adam, so that the archons would not know her and she might be a correction of the deficiency of the mother (Sophia), as an emanation out of her. [She, too, was so far archetypal.]

    The archons saw that Adam’s intelligence was higher and brought him into the shadow of death to recreate his body out of matter that is the ignorance of the darkness. He became a mortal human [and now the physical Adam], who the archons put in a paradise [a harmonic and timeless place]. There, he should eat from the “tree of life”, from the trees of godlessness [and live without God].

    The “tree of knowledge of good and evil”, however, is the Epinoia of light (v.s.) that in disobedience to Yaldabaoth improved Adam’s intelligence. [The Hebrew name in Gen 2 is more correctly translated as “tree of wisdom”!]

    Therefore Yaldabaoth put him to sleep: “’I will make their hearts heavy, that they may not pay attention and may not see.” Then the Epinoia of light went to hide inside Adam. Yaldabaoth wanted to extract her through one of Adam’s ribs, but couldn’t. He therefore made another appearance in the shape of a woman, as an image of the Epinoia, into which he brought the part of Adam’s power that was all he managed to extract. Adam became awake and saw the woman.

    Then the Epinoia of light appeared and uncovered the veil that had been put over Adam’s intelligence. [Hence, eating from that tree has nothing to do with sexuality, but with wanting to know more than Yaldabaoth would allow…]

It wasn’t a snake (an entity in the shape of a snake) that made Eve eat from the,

    “tree of knowledge [wisdom!], but it was Christ in the shape of an eagle who told her to do that, in order to “teach them and awaken them out of the depth of sleep.”

That happened against the will of Yaldabaoth.

Sophia had come down as this Epinoia in order to correct her mistake, and for that reason she was then called Life [Heva, Eve], the mother of the living. Through her they could taste full insight [they ate from the “tree of knowledge”, better: “tree of wisdom”].

Yaldabaoth saw that they were drifting away from him and cursed his Earth. He threw them out of his paradise and clothed them in darkness. He then raped Eve and through her begot two sons, who he called Cain and Abel. Later Adam begot Seth with Eve.

Yaldabaoth wanted to control the thinking of the humans and brought fate (Greek: heimarmene) into the world. Hence his whole creating became blind and couldn’t see God.

 

[Heimarmene comes from meiromai that means something like “acquire one’s part”, which may lead the thought to karma…]

[The identity Yaldabaoth = Yahweh is obvious… and as far as the archons are concerned, one may think of the Anunnaki, and Barbelo may remind us of Ti’âmat.]

Additions from other apocrypha
In the Hypostasis of the Archons [18] is written that Yaldabaoth said:

    “‘It is I who am God; there is none apart from me.’ When he said this, he sinned against the entirety. And this speech got up to Incorruptibility; then there was a voice that came forth from Incorruptibility, saying, ‘You are mistaken, Samael’”

Samael is another name of Yaldabaoth that means “god of the blind”. He is blind to all that is above him. Also here the archons wanted to “defile” Eve. It was forbidden to Adam and Eve to eat from the Tree of Knowledge.

Therefore the female spiritual principle came as a teacher in the shape of a snake and said:

    “…it was out of jealousy that he said this to you. Rather your eyes shall open and you shall come to be like gods.”

They ate and recognized that they were naked, but not in the sense of being unclothed, but “naked of the spiritual element”, i.e., they discovered that a spiritual element was missing.

Also in this text it seems that possible Cain was the result of the “defilation” of Eve by the archons, but not Abel. Is that supposed to explain the difference between them?

In The Apocalypse of Adam [19] is written that Adam said to his son Seth:

    “Then the God who created us, created a son from himself and Eve, your mother.”

Similarly as above.

In The Origin of the World [20] is written that the blood of the female principle Pronoia (Barbelo) flowed like light into the world. Out of this blood Eros arose, and with him the “pleasure of the flesh”.

Here, too, the archons “cast their seed” upon Eve, and out of the seed of the first archon (Yaldabaoth) Abel was born.

References

    17. http://web.archive.org/web/20070912005923/wwwuser.gwdg.de/~rzellwe/nhs/node62.html (in German),

    in English http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/apocjn.html and http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/apocjnlong. html
    18. http://gnosis.org/naghamm/hypostas.html
    19. http://gnosis.org/naghamm/adam.html
    20. http://gnosis.org/naghamm/origin.html

Back to Contents

 

Epilog

Why the “tree of knowledge of good and evil”? Or more correctly:

    “Tree of Wisdom [and therewith knowledge of good and evil]” - the Hebrew word for “knowledge” is jada‘ (and it also means “sexual intercourse” … e.g., in “And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain…“ [Gen 4:1]), but this word isn’t used here.

The tree is in the original text called ‘ats hada‘ at; da‘at means “Wisdom” (and the word has nothing at all to do with sexuality). Good and bad? Light and darkness? The true God and the archons?

Does this concern the “forbidden” insight: the knowledge that except Yaldabaoth/Yahweh there are above him even higher gods, and even a Highest God?

    “You shall not know about other - and certainly not about higher - gods, because I shall be your only ‘god’!”

Is it this very insight, this knowledge, which will make us free?! That Jesus wanted to give us and fore which he, therefore, had to die?

It will not be a coincidence that Yaldabaoth came to be, but a preparation for the exodus of souls from God’s light world. As the Gnostics (see Origen) taught, we all existed from the very beginning in that light world.

However, some of us wanted to go out of it to have experiences that are not possible to have in the light world - and to fully experience our free will (also in ways that are impossible in the light world). For this reason, God created various angelic levels and then a region of darkness for those, who were to fall still further down.

Yaldabaoth was intended to be the lord of that region - of the region of ignorance - and he should, therefore, be ignorant himself.

Sophia was not ignorant to the same extent but also not fully conscious of what she was really doing, when she had Yaldabaoth come into being - and it should probably be so, or she wouldn’t have done it. Also the archons have their Epinoias, but its light is deeply hidden in them.

At the end they shall also find there way out of the darkness, even Yaldabaoth (a power, who according to Goethe,

    “…always wants the evil, but as and end result yet creates the good”, that is: the souls that become free when their light-Epinoia is sufficiently awaken - illumination).

The Epinoia will open itself up in us, but institutions like the Church want to cover it up, and they don’t know what they are doing.

They want to lull us to sleep with hypnotically working brainwashing suggestions (through monotonous rituals, singing songs together in certain ways and the art of speaking of the priests, as well as other things in the liturgy, but also by means of their power). Why is the Goddess suppressed?

Because she is associated with the Epinoia and could take us to enlightenment!

 

On sexuality
We here see that “eating from the tree of knowledge” has nothing to do with sexuality, but with striving for “forbidden knowledge”. Yaldabaoth wants to keep us in ignorance. We also see that there is on all levels a kind of polarity that in Yaldabaoths world in a way got ripped apart.

We, who live in his world, are no more androgynous - in one entity both male and female - but either the one or the other. That is why we seek to reunite to one being and that is one basis of sexuality.

The other is procreation.

There are, however, teachings in various systems that we actually are both male and female, but that the one pole manifests physically in the incarnation and the other remains in the soul. That is why we can change gender from one incarnation to another.

Thus sexuality has two aspects:

        the union of two souls (with the aid of the body), and

        procreation.

Yaldabaoth wants that we shouldn’t know of the spiritual aspect.

He wants to have power over our sexuality and for that purpose reduce it to mere reproduction, because there could otherwise be a certain “danger” that we could have a little bit of spiritual awakening. And since every normally functioning human being will occasionally have sexual feelings (even though they may be suppressed, but then they subliminally are still there), this also helps to enable his power over humans.

The archons in a way still want to rape Eve and drag the competition of male sexuality in the dirt, so that it looses the spiritual aspect and is devalued).

The first aspect is the basis of tantric sexuality in India. There was something similar in certain Gnostic (fringe) groups and it also exists, e.g., in Taoism and other systems.

As concerns Indian Tantra, an educational remark needs to be added. It isn’t simply a kind of “sexual yoga” but a natural science, to which all imaginable principles, states, relationships and processes in nature belong, and this not only in the material sense.

Also sexual science belongs to it, and it is in this context that within Tantra also a kind of “sexual yoga” has evolved.

Back to Contents

 

 

    Fom: “Dr Michael Salla” <exopolitics@yahoo.com>
    Subject: [exopolitics] Anunnaki, Iraq, Stargates - Reply to Michael Sokolov
    Received: 10/8/2004 12:11:14 PM

    Aloha All, here is a further exchange of correspondence I’ve had with Michael Sokolov who has a fine grasp of Anunnaki history and the role of Reptilian ETs which dovetails with much of my own research. I’ve copied below a post I sent out on my prepare4contact forum and the response that Michael Sokolov sent. Michael’s response can be read by either clicking either the URL at the start, or by reading it at the end of this post.
    In peace
    Michael Salla, PhD
    drmsalla@exopolitics.org 

     

    Aloha Michael apologies for not replying earlier to your response about the Anunnaki and their relationship with mainstream religion (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prepare4contact/message/7789). I find myself in agreement with much of what you say and think it is very valuable to emphasize the distinction between the Anunnaki as human looking ETs and the Reptilians as basically being locked into a historical conflict over control of humanity. I have just finished reading David Icke’s “Children of the Matrix” and think that he basically simplified human history in terms of his belief that the Reptilians are in control of everything. As you know, in his view, Reptilians, the Anunnaki are the same, and that we are locked into a Prison Planet with the same set of secret rulers - the Illuminati who are basically bloodlines associated with the Reptilians, mixed in with some Nordic DNA.

    The framework you outline in your article makes much more sense and I’m happy to say that I reached the same conclusion with my own research, the Anunnaki and the Reptilians are very different and are competitors. The Illuminati are primarily associated with the Anunnaki but as you say in your response to my earlier article, there may have been significant infiltration or compromising of this organization by the Reptilians who dominate mainstream religious institutions and also in my view military institutions such as the US military.

    Due to my political science background and work in the US, I like to use political metaphors and kind of see the Anunnaki as similar to Democrats and the Reptilians as a version of the Republicans. The Democrats are more progressive and see humans as having more intrinsic value, while Republicans are more law and order types that like to carry the big stick. This is some validation for your view that we need to get behind the Anunnaki who have historically tried to assist humanity as exemplified in the stories about Enki. You therefore conclude that the Anunnaki are supporting human liberation and deserve our support.

    You write:

        “But I don’t think that the present-day descendants of Anunnaki, if they come into contact with us, would try to control us like they did before.

        The exopolitical situation now is totally different. We now have a common enemy, and defeating them is far more important than our petty differences. That is basically my main argument: we can’t compare Anunnaki and reptiles side by side and say that they are just vying for control and one is no better than the other, because they are incomparable.

        Anunnaki weren’t just “a little more compassionate to us”, we ARE them basically, and although yes, they did screwed up majorly a few times, those wounds can be healed and we can move forward together, but the dark forces of Yahweh are the enemy of Life itself. To use a Tolkien analogy (Lord of the Rings), the differences between us and Anunnaki are the little differences between humans, hobbits, elves and dwarves/gnomes, but Yahweh is Sauron and USA is Mordor.”

    As I said, I’m basically suspicious about Anunnaki in terms of their historical role and motivation and you’ve replied that caution is necessary but that an alliance is important. I can go along with that since these types of alliances are helpful in changing the political dynamics between different ET races and humanity. I do think though that rather than a dyadic conflict between the Reptilians and Anunnaki, as you suggest with your Lord of the Rings metaphor, that there is a third force involved here which comprises the kinds of ET groups that I referred to earlier which most regard as benevolent, e.g., Andromedans, Pleiadians, Arcturians, etc. So the competition or struggle for Earth is triadic. We have two interventionist factions, Reptilians and Anunnaki who have different approaches to how to manage the Earth, kind of like the Republican and Democrat approaches, and we have a third faction which is primarily non-interventionist and use consciousness raising.

    I think that our best allies are the non-interventionists, but that alliances with ETs such as Anunnaki makes sense given the present exopolitical situation on Earth.

    Now what you say about the Anunnaki in terms of the invasion of Iraq is significant and I wish to reflect a little on that. You say:

        “OK, it’s time for me to drop another bombshell. Brace yourself. I believe Saddam Hussein was/is a good guy. All the bad things they say about him are reptilian propaganda. He undug some ancient Anunnaki equipment and was able to reactivate it. He reestablished contact with Anunnaki and was trying to bring them back. That’s why they wanted him out.”

    Now I certainly suspected that Saddam had found something and that was why the US really went in. Most of the evidence I could find in my own paper and book chapter was circumstantial yet when all put together was pretty persuasive. Fortunately, whistleblowers such as Dan Burisch were able to confirm this so I felt pretty confident that I was on the right track. I’d like to know any sources you used to support your similar conclusion and to share this with us. Perhaps your Russian sources are more forthcoming on why Uncle Sam went into Iraq?

    The key now shifts to what it was that Saddam wanted to open the Stargates for. Would it have been the Anunnaki who would have come in with the desire to physically liberate the Earth from the covert Reptilian control and thus support Saddam as a ‘righteous ruler’ or ‘good guy’ as you say; or would it have been a Draconian Reptilian invasion force that would have manipulated Saddam to basically impose overt Reptilian control of Earth.

    Whichever scenario it was, one could say that that the Bush administration did the right thing with its foray into Iraq since it now effectively controlled the Stargate and prevented an overt Reptilian or Anunnaki presence coming through that would align itself with Saddam. I don’t see Saddam as a good guy since he basically started a series of wars since he came to power in 1978 that began with Iran and basically impoverished his people.

    Certainly no good guy in my book but from a certain perspective he did offer an alternative to covert Reptilian control and I see that is what you are getting at. At the same time, I don’t feel we have enough information to know for sure who would have come through the activated stargates, and the consequences may well have been a more destructive regional war involving overt intervention by ETs that would have sided with Saddam.

    I would appreciate any more information you have on what may have come through the Iraqi stargates and why you feel so confident it would have been the Anunnaki rather than the Draco Reptilians which is what I believe most commentators have opined.

    I look forward to hearing from you.
    Michael S.

     

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prepare4contact/message/7789
    Aloha Dr. Salla,

        > Thank you for sharing your insights and reflections on the Anunnaki
        > and Jehovah in your paper examining the exopolitical history of
        > humanity

    Thank you for the compliment!

        > I also agree with you that a key historical event was the
        > disappearance of the Anunnaki around 2000 BC. Now your insight here
        > that this signified a take over by another group of ETs led by
        > Jehovah is very insightful.

    I have also been able to scavenge enough data from the ancient clues to construct a mathematical model of the orbit of Nibiru / Planet X, and guess what, in that fateful year 2024 BCE it was precisely in its aphelion, the farthest out point. Think about it, if you are an outsider seeking to attack the Anunnaki bases on Earth, when would be the best time for attack?
    I will present my model of the orbit of Planet X in my book, along with the full chain of reasoning that led to it.

        > This would explain why Yahweh could not be seen [...]

    I have also pondered the possibility that Yahweh did not want anyone to see his physical form because he was so extremely ugly and gross. Which brings us to the following thought... does anyone remember the highly negative “disclosure briefing” John Lear gave to Art Bell last year? When he was “showing” the 18 alien species known to the shadow government, he made a comment about one of them:

        “These are five-second slides of the 18 different alien species we are looking at. That one there is the most gruesome-looking. The guards at one facility are carefully indoctrinated over a period of several months being shown pictures similar to but not exactly like the alien. Only when they’d been acclimatized, so to speak, to the horrible-looking beings are they allowed to stand in security positions. Before these acclimatization were done, we had two guards die of a heart attack as the aliens came down the hallway unexpectedly.”

    That made me wonder... I’m not even 100% sure of the reptilian nature, to be honest. Another candidate for this ugly monster is the praying mantis alien. Some remote viewer has seen a praying mantis when peeking back into 1930s at some folks talking in German about the atomic bomb.

    Hmm, Yahwist reptilian-insectoids helping Nazis... But then we know that Hitler was in fact a Jew, an illegitimate grandson of one of the Rothschilds.

    (And for those wondering, my answer to the Lear Test is an emphatic Yes.)

        > It was another ET race, the Reptilians, who basically came and took
        > over the Earth by gaining the allegiance of various tribes such as
        > the Hebrews.

    . and I believe their methods involved mental takeover, neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) and Controlled Remote Influencing (CRI). I will write more about this in my book.

        > Now there
        > are a couple of areas where it would be useful getting some
        > clarification and a disagreement over who are the best allies of
        > humanity in the present exopolitical situation on Earth.

    OK...

        > First, the role of the Illuminati in what has been described so far
        > is critical.

    Yes.

        > Who exactly are they? Are they remnants of the Anunnaki
        > control that previously existed (my initial idea) or extensions of
        > the Reptilian takeover (Icke’s idea) or a combination of both?

    I believe the former. Of course considering that the Yahwists’ primary modus operandi seems to be mental takeover and reprogramming, it is entirely possible and plausible that many of the Illuminati have fallen to their side.

        > My
        > guess is that the Illuminati are more closely aligned with the
        > Anunnaki which is why there has been historic conflict between the
        > Illuminati and Religious institutions such as the Catholic Church
        > which presumably are bastions of Reptilian control.

    Very sharp, that’s exactly my reasoning.

        > E.g, the Knight
        > Templars and their destruction by the Catholic Church, here the
        > Anunnaki elite are destroyed by the Jehoavah/Yahweh based elite.

    Yes, and think about what got the Templars in trouble in the first place: they undug something in the ruins of Jerusalem, which we know from Sitchin is the site of Anunnaki’s Command Centre. Now think about these two questions:

        1. What is the most restricted and most secure place on Earth today?
        It is not the White House. It is not the Pentagon. It is not Kremlin. It is the Dome on the Rock in Jerusalem. Or Area 51. One of those two.

        Or rather they are probably about equal. Now what does it tell you, the mere fact that those two can be listed side by side like this? They are fundamentally of the same nature, major ET sites on Earth.

        2. What is the never-ending conflict between Israel and Palestine all about?

        It’s about Jerusalem. Even more specifically, about who ought to own that Sacred Spot. It is the apple of the dispute.

        Now why is it so special? Why is it worth risking World War III over? We know why it was so important in the past - it was the Anunnaki Command Centre. But why is it so important now? Merely because of its ancient history? I doubt that. What if there is some interplanetary communication equipment still operating there TODAY?

    And one more point. We’ve all heard of government mind control and programming. They are putting programs in us. But think about it: where are the programs coming from? I’m a computer programmer by profession and know very well that programs need to be written by programmers, distributed, etc. What if the programs being beamed into our minds by the shadow government are being DOWNLOADED to Earth (from Alpha Draconis?) through the interplanetary radio link at Mt. Moriah in Jerusalem and then distributed further?

    I have a lot more to say about that Sacred Spot on Mt. Moriah, but I will save the rest for my book. Stay tuned.

        > In your analysis, if the Illuminati are associated with the
        > Anunnaki, they are the good guys.

    Yes. I know this will be a great shocker to this whole community which generally sees the Illuminati as the root of all evil. This is one of the hardest to swallow bits of my research. That’s why I don’t like just dropping this on people, I want to ease it on through point-by-point reasoning and evidence in my book. But you sort of prodded it out of me.

        > The conflict in Iraq has
        > echoes of this ancient conflict between the Anunnaki and the Jehovah
        > based religionists who are secretly a front for the Reptilians. I’d
        > be interested in hearing your thoughts on this.

    I fully agree with you that the war in Iraq is an exopolitical conflict.

    We independently reached the same conclusions. When the whole saber-rattling about Iraq was just starting, I realized from the get-go what was going on: “oh great, invasion of Sumer”.

    I was also very delighted to see your exopolitical comment about the downing of Space Shuttle Columbia on the eve of the invasion of Eden, accompanied by the Eye of Horus around the Sun. When I first heard about Columbia going down, I was quite delighted that the Anunnaki got at least some small revenge for the desecration and stomping of their holy land by the Yankees. That was my immediate reaction, seeing your exopolitical comment was a pleasant confirmation later. You and I are probably the only two people on the planet who have made the connection between the downing of Columbia and the war in Iraq. And then also Columbia carried the first Israeli into space... Anunnaki weren’t very pleased, and I understand them.

    OK, it’s time for me to drop another bombshell. Brace yourself. I believe Saddam Hussein was/is a good guy. All the bad things they say about him are reptilian propaganda. He undug some ancient Anunnaki equipment and was able to reactivate it. He reestablished contact with Anunnaki and was trying to bring them back. That’s why they wanted him out.

    And just recently I heard on Coast to Coast that Saddam’s lawyer argues for his client having a right to run in the Iraqi elections, and some poll showing that 42% of Iraqis want him back. Wouldn’t it be great if the Iraqis elect him democratically? That would be a powerful message to the reptoids, we don’t want Yahwists, Yankees and their lies here, we want our true gods and goddesses, the Anunnaki, and our legitimate President Saddam Hussein!

        > The problem
        > then shifts from Reptilians per se, to hybrid human-Reptilians that
        > comprises the Enki faction of the Anunnaki.

    “Problem”? Enki is not a “problem”, he was a hero and a saint in my book! This is probably the area where I disagree with you and a number of other people who think of Anunnaki as controlling and manipulative.
    It is true that Anu was very authoritarian, and his son Enlil (whose mother was Anu’s wife and half-sister Antu, i.e., pure Anu race) was the same way. Enki was very different. His mother was one of Anu’s concubines, who I believe was a Sirian queen or princess.

    So Enki was only half Anu race, the other half Sirian. His exopolitics was also totally different from Anu’s. While the Enlilites indeed established an aristocratic social order in the civilizations under their control, and I have to agree that they were too controlling and undemocratic, I do not see a single shred of evidence of any such controlling behavior on Enki’s part. Enki managed the ancient Egypt, and note that all of celestial alignments in the pyramids point to Sirius and the belt stars of Orion, NOT to Rigel which is where I believe the planet of Anu came from (I’ll explain this in my book).

    Enki was NEVER interested in any manipulation and control of humans, and he was always interested in giving humans as much as possible in the way of civilization, wisdom and spirituality. And his son Marduk even wanted to teach humans how to build rockets and go to space in 3500 BCE! (I’m talking about the Bab-Ili rocket launch tower of course.) After the nuclear holocaust of 2024 BCE Enki, risking his own life, went around in the radioactive fields of Shumer trying to use his scientific/magical tricks to clean up the place as much as possible and to make plants grow again.

        > Now the final point I wish to make and where I feel we disagree is
        > with the idea that the Anunnaki are our allies in freeing the earth
        > from the Reptilians who use Jehovah/Yahweh/Allah as covers for their
        > secret domination of Earth. As I see it, there are two ET factions
        > who have historically competed for control of Earth. By choosing one
        > faction over the other, presumably because it is genetically more
        > human and has shown evidence or being more compassionate than the
        > other, doesn’t appear to be very transformative to me.

    Yes, we disagree a little here. I don’t believe that the Enki faction ever had any intent of domination and control, and therefore they ought to perfectly qualify as our true allies. As for the rest of the Anu clan, i.e., the Enlilites, they indeed had a few undesirable qualities, and I agree with you that we need to be careful with them. But I’m not saying that we should revert totally to the old ways and just bow down to them. We should welcome them as friends, but on new terms: as friends and not as overlords.

    But I don’t think that the present-day descendants of Anunnaki, if they come into contact with us, would try to control us like they did before.

    The exopolitical situation now is totally different. We now have a common enemy, and defeating them is far more important than our petty differences. That is basically my main argument: we can’t compare Anunnaki and reptiles side by side and say that they are just vying for control and one is no better than the other, because they are incomparable.

    Anunnaki weren’t just “a little more compassionate to us”, we ARE them basically, and although yes, they did screwed up majorly a few times, those wounds can be healed and we can move forward together, but the dark forces of Yahweh are the enemy of Life itself. To use a Tolkien analogy (Lord of the Rings), the differences between us and Anunnaki are the little differences between humans, hobbits, elves and dwarves/gnomes, but Yahweh is Sauron and USA is Mordor.

    (Speaking of Tolkien... I can’t help but notice a striking similarity between his description of the elves and Altairans... But of course like everything else, it’s just a coincidence... grin)

        > I think we can look beyond these two factions for a solution and
        > find the answer in other ET races that are not associated with
        > either faction that are used to running the Earth. A number of
        > contactees have spoken of ET races from Andromeda, Arcturus, Sirius
        > A., Pleiades, etc., who are also here trying to assist humanity in
        > its evolution.

    Which brings us to my favorite slogan: Proletarians of all planets, unite!

    (It is of course derived from Karl Marx’ famous “Proletarians of all counties, unite!”, and yes, I am a Communist and I’ll reveal some startling Soviet-Anunnaki connections in my book.)

        > However, I believe
        > that even the Anunnaki cannot be fully trusted due to ingrained
        > habits of control and elitism that would soon result in new
        > institutions of power and control that would enslave/limit portions
        > of humanity.

    Yes, and I certainly don’t suggest that we blindly entrust them with everything, but again I believe in giving them a second chance as friends rather than controllers, and I really believe that they have learned a lesson and will now know that it’s much better to cooperate rather than control, and that in open cooperation we will be much stronger together and much more effective in fighting the forces of darkness.

    Love & light and Blessed Be,
    Michael Sokolov
    Engineer / Researcher / Truth seeker / Freedom fighter

by John Lash

from MetaHistory Website

Spanish version

 

Assuming the arrogant pose of a solar deity, Yaldabaoth falsely believes himself to be the only god in the entire cosmos.

Thus, for Gnostics, the identification of Yaldabaoth with Jehovah of the Old Testament, a deity who suffers from this very complex of cosmic egotism, is a foregone conclusion, prefigured in the Sophianic origin myth.

Being blind, he cannot perceive the Pleroma (galactic core), nor does he recognize Sophia, the cosmic current that surged from the core and produced him in the first place.

He becomes infatuated, bloated with grandiosity, causing Sophia to feel shame and want to hide him from the sight of the Pleromic Aeons.

    "She cast him away from her radiance, so that no one among the immortal ones might see him... She joined a luminous cloud with him, and placed a throne in the middle of the cloud."

    (Apoc John BG 38, 1-10)

The Aeon Sophia is that cosmic current whose impact organizes the dema and produces the Archons.

This happens because She acts unilaterally in Her plunge from the galactic core, but Sophia does not unilaterally cause the birth of the Sun. This is a process continually occurring in the galactic limbs, due to the physics of the limb structure itself. In an action that might be compared to a mill wheel grinding stones, the galactic armature churns and refines elementary matter, constantly producing star-birth, the promise of new worlds of experience.

The key to the unique status of our planetary system is the convergence of Sophia's impact with the nebular expulsion of a newborn star. The material of the Archons is incorporated into that material vortex that forms around this star, and Sophia herself fixes the chief Archon centrally ("enthroned") in the center of the proto-planetary disk ("luminous cloud").

Overseen by Yaldabaoth, the Archons now proceed to fabricate the planetary system from the inorganic elements of which them themselves are composed. As they have no intentionality (ennoia) and no creative capacity (epinoia) of their own, they can only do this by imitation.

The Apocryphon of John (II, 10, 24-25) describes how the Lord Archon "produced for himself cyclic worlds (orbiting bodies) from the luminous spark that still shines in the sky." Thus, he draws upon the vortex power of the central star, the newborn Sun, to organize the matter swirling in the proto-planetary disk.

Yaldabaoth originates nothing, however. He can only copy the model of the Pleroma, without even knowing that he does so:

    And he was amazed by his own arrogance, for he seemed to beget material powers (exousiai, "authorities") out of his own solitary power, but after the patterns of the imperishable Aeons... And so there came to be a stereoma ("firmament") corresponding to the cyclic formations of the Pleroma.
    (II, 10, 26-28, and 12, 25)

Gnostic teachings constantly emphasize that the Archons are imitators who cannot produce anything original, yet they arrogantly claim they can.

The Lord Archon is called antimimon pneuma, "counterfeit spirit." (Apoc John III, 36:17. The term occurs several times in different texts.) The cosmos he produces is described by the Coptic term hal, "simulation." The vast planetary system of the Archons is a stereoma, a virtual reality projection in simulation of a higher dimensional pattern.

Typically, the Archontic framework of the planetary system has been depicted by "armillary bands" that surround the Earth. (Illustration from A. Cellarius, Harmonia Macrocosma, 1660.) Taken in many esoteric systems (Hermetics and Rosicrucianism) as the preeminent image of cosmic harmony, the model of the planetary spheres reflects a mindless imitation of divine design, not the living reality of the cosmos.

Yaldabaoth, the presumed all-mighty creator God, really creates nothing; instead, he copies from "archetypal" patterns in the Pleroma. The planetary stereoma of his making is like a plastic copy of an abalone shell. Only someone who does not know the reality of the abalone shell, and what living miracle of nature is required to produce it, would accept the plastic substitution. Here again, the cosmic-noetic parallel applies: Archons simulate in the cosmos at large, and they also simulate in the human mind. This is a key indication of their effect, a clue to their subtle intrusion tactics.

The main cosmological texts in the Nag Hamadi Library (NHL), On the Origin of the World, The Hypostasis of the Archons, and The Apocryphon of John, are consistent in describing how the solar system arises as an inorganic simulation of the living pattern of the eternal Aeons. Here is further insight into "the generation of error."

One might be excused (but just barely) for mistaking plastic for pearl, but it would be terrible ignorance indeed to be unaware that it takes an entire ocean and a living, symbiotic biosphere to produce a pearl. Yet such is the ignorance of the Archons that they cannot comprehend the living miracle of divine order, rooted in the Pleroma, even when they are imitating it.

The stereoma of the Archons is truly a grandiose accomplishment, rather like the many-roomed Venetian palace of a Mafia don afflicted with religious grandiosity and a militaristic sense of the command chain:

    Now the prime parent (archigenetor), the master breeder of the Archons, since he commanded vast orbiting worlds, produced heavens for each of his offspring... beautiful dwellings, and in each heaven Yaldabaoth produced glorious decor, seven times excellent: thrones and mansions and temples, and also chariots and celestial virgins... consigning to each one its own heaven-like realm, and providing them with mighty armies of gods and commanders and messengers and overseers, in countless myriads, so that they might all serve and be served.
    On the Origin of the World, 19.

Readers familiar with the archetypal psychology of C. G. Jung will recognize in this passage all the elements of the heaven archetype common to the mainstream religions:

        heavenly mansions

        celestial armies

        cloud chariots

        virgins on order

        choirs of angels arranged with military precision

The stereoma is loaded with spiritual kitsch.

If anyone needs evidence of how the Archons can infect human imagination, here it is, seven times excellent
 CHAPTER FIFTEEN
GODS OF A NEW WORLD ORDER

Lifting the Veil
Where are the Gods now and what are the implications for the future?

These questions lead us inevitably into a reconsideration of world history, particularly the period from 2000-200 BC. This period began in the aftermath of the nuclear destruction of Sodom, Gomorrah and the Sinai space centre. It is a period which encompasses the Biblical figures of Isaac, Jacob, Joseph and Moses, where we have detailed textual accounts but little archaeological evidence.

Elsewhere, however, it is the opposite archaeological evidence but few textual accounts. A veil of darkness descends over an era of widespread chaos and warfare. By the time that era had ended, most of the cities of the ancient world had been razed to the ground. Prior to 2000 BC, the Sumerians wrote down everything, even the most trivial day-to-day events. However, in the period 2000-200 BC, few records were made, and even fewer survived.

Archaeology thus becomes our prime tool of knowledge, but it is a blunt tool - a laborious process of hard work and guess work, which is a long way from being an exact science. As a result, we have only the flimsiest understanding of events in this key period of mankind’s history. Whilst I am not a recognized historian, it quickly became apparent to me that, for this particular period, there are no experts.

On the contrary, empires rose and fell for no apparent reason, mysterious “Hyksos” people conquered Egypt, mysterious “Sea People” appeared from nowhere to ravage the Near East, and advanced civilizations arose in the New World of the Americas, as if out of thin air. As I attempted to peer through the veil of history to identify the continued presence (or otherwise) of the Gods, I found that many mysterious historic events began to make sense.

Unintentionally, I was putting the revised paradigm of Gods of the New MilIennium to the test - and it was scoring rather highly, to put it mildly. My main objective, however, was to search for the activities of the Gods, and that presented me with quite a challenge. How can one verify the presence of Gods in such a chaotic period? Surprisingly perhaps, there were numerous clues to follow. For instance, the name of a king or pharaoh would, more often than not, commemorate their allegiance to a specific God.

Similarly, a work of art would depict a recognizable symbol of a God, whether in the image of a serpent, a bull or even a bare-breasted Goddess. Finally, there were some useful inscriptions which directly evoked the names of particular Gods for particular nations. In this way, it was possible to construct a political overview of world events. But how could I verify the physical presence of these Gods? How could I be sure that kings did not call upon absent Gods?

The first reliable indicator was technological intervention. Sometimes this is described in texts, such as the Ark of the Covenant in the Bible. Sometimes it appears in a physical form, such as the pyramids which still exist at Teotihuacan. The second indicator was also a physical one - the sheer scale of destruction in the ancient cities. This scale of destruction stares archaeologists in the face every time they excavate. but how could so many cities have been razed to the ground using only fire, swords, bows and arrows?

The greatest problem I faced in writing this chapter was that of chronology. Following the publication of David Rohl’s A Test of Time in 1995, big question marks hang over the conventional chronology of the Egyptian pharaohs. Furthermore, Rohl’s new chronology proved to have knock-on effects elsewhere, particularly as a result of dating the Babylonian king Hammurabi more than two hundred years later than previously thought.

I personally find Rohl’s new chronology rather convincing and have therefore chosen to use it throughout this chapter, indicated where appropriate by the initials “NC". Nevertheless, whilst this debate remains unsettled, some caution must be in order.

 

Back to the Beginning
Before embarking on our search for the presence or absence of the Gods after 2000 BC, it is appropriate to remind ourselves briefly of the historical context established so far, with particular emphasis on man’s tribal origins and allegiances.

Our revision begins with the Flood, when three lines of mankind emerged from Noah’s Ark.

        the dark-skinned tribes of Ham went south to the African lands

        the tribes of Shem settled in the Levant and the highlands around Mesopotamia

        the tribes of Japheth went north, to the Anatolian plateau (in modern-day Turkey) and beyond

There was, however, one important exception. Prior to the war of the Gods c. 8700 BC, Canaan, a son of Ham, had illegally occupied the land of Lebanon.

Although his Canaanite tribe was allowed to stay, the Bible records that they were relegated to a servile status. Between 11000-4000 BC, man possessed the same latent intelligence he possesses today, but was generally confined to living a nomadic lifestyle. Human populations quickly spread throughout the world.

Then, from 3800 BC onwards, a series of developments created a new elite of civilized men.

It began with the cities of Sumer, which were rebuilt in their pre-Flood locations, coinciding with the return of the planet Nibiru and the royal visit of Anu. At the same time, the God Ishkur began a new phase of construction at Tiwanaku for the manufacture of bronze. In 3113 BC, civilization was extended to Egypt - a decision which was necessary to restore the chaos caused by the exile of Marduk and the ensuing power vacuum.

From its beginning, Egyptian civilization embraced the Minoan culture of nearby Crete, where archaeologists have found extensive evidence of close trading ties. The first Egyptian pharaohs, beginning with the legendary Menes, were in all likelihood Sumerians, imposed on Egypt with the consent of its highest God, Enki. It is surely no coincidence that the name Menes is mirrored by the legendary first ruler of Crete, named Minos.

These two mysterious characters are almost certainly the same person. The native people of Egypt were also closely related to those of Crete, the Cretan natives being one of the tribes descended from Ham’s son Mizraim, the father of the Egyptians. Some three hundred years later, c. 2800 BC, civilization was granted to the people of the Indus Valley, under the aegis of the Goddess Inanna.

The Indus region quickly became an important supplier of grain to Sumeria but suffered a serious setback when its main port city, Lethal, was engulfed by a flood c. 2400 BC. It may be no coincidence that, at the same time, the Akkadian empire arose under Inanna via the conquests of Sargon the Great.

Inanna’s move began a sequence of events that destroyed the Sumerian “golden age”, and which climaxed with the return of Marduk to Babylon in 2024 BC. Historians believe that Marduk’s supporters, who began a new dynasty of kings in Babylon, were the Amorites, a major tribe among the Canaanites and thus of Hamitic stock. It was then, as Marduk occupied Babylon and threatened to capture the space facilities, that Nergal and Ninurta unleashed nuclear weapons to destroy Sodom, Gomorrah and the space centre in Sinai.

As the nuclear fall-out cloud descended on Sumer, man and his Gods stood at the brink of a new age of further death and destruction.

 

World Migrations 2000 BC
It is no coincidence that history books refer repeatedly to the year 2000 BC as a major turning point for many regions of the world.

The “Big Picture”, which the books do not identify, includes the fall of Sumer (the Third Dynasty of Ur) to the “evil wind” and the unprecedented wave of human migration which followed caused not so much by the nuclear fall-out per se, but by the political aftermath of the invasion of the Amorites and the consequent upheaval.

Prior to 2000 BC, civilization was restricted to those areas already mentioned. Then, after 2000 BC, agriculture, astronomy, metallurgy and most significantly, writing, suddenly appeared all over the world. First, however, we must deal with the exception. From around 2000 BC, the Indus Valley civilization entered what is described as a decadent phase. The reasons for this are identified by archaeologists as the widespread flooding of its major cities in 2000 BC and 1900 BC respectively.

For Lethal, it was the second such disaster, and its docks were completely silted up. Interestingly, one of the foremost experts on Indus archaeology, S. Rao, attributes the 2000 BC flood to “tectonic disturbances”, which are quite possibly a side-effect of the nuclear strike in Sinai.

The Indus disaster may well account for the appearance of the Aryans (“Noble Ones·’) who migrated into northern India at this time, bringing with them the sacred Sanskrit language. Meanwhile, the refugees from Sumer passed by the flooded Indus region and headed east toward Thailand and China.

The history books record the mysterious arrival of technology in those regions:

    “The record of East Asia’s movement into the metal Ages is cloudy. About 2000 BC, peoples of the Khorat Plateau of present-day Thailand, the Red river region of Vietnam, and the North China Plain appear to have moved directly from the Stone Age into the Bronze Age.”

    “The advent of bronze in China is peculiar for the advanced technology which was operated from the very beginning, as seen in the vessels and weapons from Cheng-chou and Anyang.”

Writing, as highlighted earlier, is also a big clue to these migrations. Studies have proved conclusively that the earliest form of Chinese writing, which arose shortly after 2000 BC, was derived from Sumerian. The pictographic signs not only looked similar, but were pronounced the same way, whilst terms which had various meanings in Sumerian often had the same multiple meanings in Chinese.

Elsewhere in the Far East, the Tibetan language is one of many that have also been traced to Sumerian, whilst the Hsing Nu people of northern Tibet are reported to be of Mesopotamian origin, and claim to have fled from a fiery cataclysm. Migrations also took place to the west, as evidenced by massive changes on Crete dating to 2000 BC. The spectacular 5-acre, multi-storey palace at Knossos is dated to this time, together with the palace at Phaistos.

Even further west, some historians believe that the earliest Mayan settlement at Dzibilchaltun may have occurred around 2000 BC. The starting point of the Mayan calendar in 3113 BC indicates that the Maya were emigrants from somewhere in the Egyptian/Cretan sphere of influence.

Meanwhile, in Babylon, a quasi-monotheistic movement was set in motion by the God Marduk, to whom all of the other Gods officially became subordinate.

In order to signify his hero status, the name Marduk was substituted for that of Nibiru in the Enuma Elish, whilst the name of his spouse Sarpanit replaced Inanna/Ishtar, who was Marduk’s traditional enemy. Under Marduk’s guidance, Babylon rose to became a great city, its name meaning the “Gateway of the Gods”.

Its Amorite leaders built a huge 7-storey ziggurat in Marduk’s honour, naming it the E.TEMEN.AN.KI - “Temen’s House of Heaven and Earth”, which was also known rather intriguingly as the E-sagila - “The Temple that Raises its Head”.

 

A New World Order
The rise of Babylon as a major world power could not have been achieved without international trade.

The presence of Amorites at the key Mediterranean port of Byblos from 2000-1700 BC confirms the role of that city within a Babylonian Egyptian-Cretan trade axis. First, however, it was necessary for Marduk’s supporters to gain the upper hand in Egypt.

In the aftermath of a huge wave of migration, northern Egypt was being ruled by pharaohs of the 11th Dynasty, bearing foreign names such as Inyotef and Montuhotep. One of these pharaohs, Montuhotep II, had reunited the whole of Egypt in an enormously long reign of 51 years. Shortly after 1800 BC (NC), however, a new line of 12th Dynasty pharaohs was begun by Amenemhat I, his name signifying worship of the hidden God Amen/Marduk.

It was at this time that the Israelites were prospering in Egypt, having arrived during the reign of Montuhotep II. A later pharaoh, Senuseret I, saw these Israelites as a threat and thus enslaved them. The Bible records that they were forced to build the cities Pithom and Rameses.

Marduk’s 12th Dynasty marked a renaissance of Egyptian achievement, which included the conquering of Nubia, the region to the south which was famous for its gold and trade with the African interior. It was almost certainly this expansion that caused one group of Nubians to migrate permanently to Mali, West Africa, where they became known as the Dogon (see chapter 5).

As Marduk attempted to build his new world order from Babylon, other, rival kingdoms began to emerge elsewhere. One independent power arose at Mari, a city already established on the River Euphrates, where archaeologists have found an impressive palace, library and archives, and more significantly a series of shrines dedicated to Marduk’s great rival Inanna/Ishtar. At around the same time, another city, Ashur, was founded on the River Tigris, with Inanna once again being the major deity.

Mari and Ashur were both strategically positioned on two major trade routes, one from Babylon to the Mediterranean, the other from the Zagros Mountains to Anatolia bringing supplies of tin to the Hittites. From their initially peaceful beginnings, these people would eventually coalesce into the cruel and ruthless might of Assyria.

Another independent power emerged to the south of Babylon, where Ninurta re-gathered the Elamite forces which had been defeated by Marduk’s Amorites, and began to rebuild a military force centered on the cities of Larsa and Susa.

Last but not least, a long way to the north, in Anatolia, the kings of the Hittites set down their roots at Kanesh (modern day Kultepe) and fortified the city of Hattusas (Boghaskoy) to become the new capital of a powerful kingdom that would play a major role in the ancient Near East for around a thousand years.

 

Hittites, Hurrians and Indo-European Origins
Who exactly were the Hittites of Anatolia? Some scholars have confused them with the Hittites of the Bible - a Hamitic tribe according to the Table of Nations.

However, the Anatolians’ written language was a distinctive mixture of archaic Indo-European script and Sumerian loan-words, leading most scholars to believe that they were of Indo-European origin.

The name “Hittite” came only from their geographical association with the land of Hatti (Anatolia) and its capital city Hattusas. The Hittites became close neighbours to an equally intriguing and powerful people known as the Hurrians, who have been labelled the world’s first Indo-Europeans.

Both of these peoples are destined to play an important role in the history I am about to unfold.

But in order to understand the background to these two great powers, and hence their motivations, it is first necessary to make a quick detour into the science of linguistics. We must understand what the term “Indo-European” actually means!

The languages of mankind are divided by linguists into two distinct branches Indo-European and Non-Indo-European.

        The Indo-European branch includes English, German and 138 other languages. These languages, spoken by nearly half the world’s population, are incredibly similar in structure and form.”

        The Non Indo-European branch, in contrast, represents a more diverse variety of tongues. All of the evidence suggests that the latter diversity is “normal”, arising from the separation of man after the Flood into numerous small, parochial and self-sufficient communities.

The homogeneous nature of the Indo-European languages is therefore regarded as an anomaly - a very important anomaly, which can shed light on the origins of the so-called “white Caucasian” people.

Scientists agree that, at some point in the past, a huge migratory wave must have brought the Indo-European language to most of northern Europe. Even more intriguing is the fact that the cradle of civilization - the first international city-state of Sumer - spoke a Semitic rather than an Indo-European language. So where did the latter come from?

It is a question which has caused deep confusion and bitter disagreement among scholars. Once again, it is a mystery which can be solved only by reference to the Gods. Linguistic scientists believe that an Indo-European mother-tongue must have existed c.3000 BC and began to break up around 2500 BC. This matches the date at which a new civilization was begun in the Indus Valley by the Goddess Inanna c. 2800 BC.

A long Sumerian text known as Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta describes how the God Enki was angered by this development and decided to change the language of the Indus people! It would seem that his plan was to sabotage communication between the Indus and Inanna’s city of Uruk in Sumer, an action undoubtedly motivated by the manner in which Inanna had stolen his precious ME’s (see chapter 6).

This intervention by Enki is remarkably consistent chronologically with the scientific theory. How did the Hittites manage to migrate from the Indus to Anatolia?

No-one knows for certain, but there are two important clues. One clue is the Hittites’ use of Sumerian loan words, suggesting a prior stay in Mesopotamia. The other clue is a connection with the Goddess Inanna, indicated by the oldest Hittite traditions in Anatolia. Inanna had two main cities in Mesopotamia, which are possible points of Hittite origin. One is Uruk, the other Agade, and both were founded before the Hittites first settled at Kanesh in Anatolia c. 2300 BC.

Uruk is thought to have had the closest links to the Indus civilization, and it is thus possible that the Hittites came from an Indo-European colony, established there to overcome the bilingual difficulties of the Indus-Sumerian agricultural trade. Alternatively, it is possible that the Hittites represent a remnant from Agade, the city of Inanna which the Gods wiped from the face of the Earth c. 2250 BC (see chapter 10).

The presence of the Indo-European Hittites in Agade might in turn be connected to the catastrophic flooding of the Indus port city of Lethal, which occurred very soon after the rise of Agade as a new power c. 2400 BC.

Did the Hurrians also originate from the Indus?

Studies of the Hurrians have highlighted the Indo-European names of their Gods and kings, whilst stressing that their language, like the Hittites, made extensive use of Sumerian/Akkadian loan words. All of the evidence suggests that the Hurrians were the great traders of the ancient world.

They were highly prominent in Ur, where they were associated with the garment industry, and they also controlled major trade routes through cities such as Harran. It would seem that, from the earliest times, the Hurrians plied the trade routes all the way from the Mediterranean to the Indus Valley.

How far did the Hurrians travel?

In chapter 14, we noted Indo-European racial features on the statues of Easter Island. An archaic Indo-European script has also been found there. It is possible that the Hurrians may have been the supervisors of Tiwanaku, based on my belief that the Easter Islanders were Negroes exiled from Tiwanaku.

This view is strengthened by the fact that the main Hurrian deity was none other than Teshub - the master of Tiwanaku and Nazca.

 

Solutions from Santorini
We will return to the Hurrians and Hittites in due course, but first let us move forward chronologically.

One of the most significant historic events in the period 2000-200 BC was undoubtedly the massive eruption of Santorini. When this volcanic Greek island exploded, 192 million tons of sulphuric ash fell as acid rain to the east - the biggest volcanic explosion in more than 4,000 years. Experts believe that the effects of Santorini would have included global climatic cooling and a famine in the east lasting at least seven years.

The affected lands included Egypt, Anatolia and the Levant -basically the whole of the ancient world with the exception of Mesopotamia. On what date did Santorini erupt? Improved scientific methods, correlating tree ring and radiocarbon dating, have now established that the explosion occurred c. 1628 BC, much earlier than previously thought.

This dating ties in well with events in the ancient Near East. The climatic change resulting from the Santorini eruption could help to explain why the Egyptians began to closely monitor the annual levels of the Nile inundation’s under Amenemhat III c. 1660-1615 BC (NC), as evidenced by the so called “High Nile Inscriptions”.

Santorini might also explain the claim by Herodotus that the same Amenemhat III was the legendary King Moeris, who constructed the Nile flood catchment hydraulic system in the Faiyum region. The High Nile Inscriptions demonstrate a concern that was soon justified by events, for the flood levels rose to almost double the ideal level for a period of twelve years.

The consequence was catastrophic damage and a long-lasting famine. It is not surprising that, under David Rohl’s new chronology, Egypt’s 12th Dynasty went into a decline, marked by the Second Intermediate Period of chaos.

It was at this time that Nubia, the land conquered three hundred years earlier, finally threw off the Egyptian yoke. Santorini also explains the mysterious rise c. 1600 BC of a new world power that of Mycenae just outside the affected zone. The Mycenaeans worshipped a bare-breasted mother-Goddess, identifiable without a doubt as Inanna.

Under her influence, the Mycenaeans suddenly enjoyed a powerful trading position, and were able to build a powerful military machine. Finally, the date of Santorini ties in to the era of Hammurabi, 1565-1522 BC under the new chronology. Under the old, established chronology, this renowned Babylonian king ruthlessly set about subjugating his former allies for no apparent reason. It has thus been assumed that his conquests must have signified the beginnings of the Babylonian empire.

Under the new chronology, tied in to Santorini, his actions were instead necessary to re-establish control during a time of great chaos, when famine was driving waves of migrants eastwards into Mesopotamia. The famous “Law Code’’ stele which Hammurabi erected at Sippar, just north of Babylon, may well have been a warning to these immigrants to watch their conduct. This scenario also sheds light on the Law Code’s reference to three classes of people - free men, slaves, and a category known as mushkenu.

The latter word, of uncertain meaning, is understood to imply a category of state-dependants, and would neatly describe the new group of immigrants. The huge influx of migrants placed an unbearable pressure on the established Babylonian infrastructure. Under these circumstances, the opportunity arose for several cities to make their bids for independence from the central authority at Babylon.

The threat to the status quo was so intense that Marduk decided to arm Hammurabi with a powerful weapon in order to reunify the empire:

    “With the powerful weapon with which Marduk proclaimed his triumphs, the hero Hammurabi overthrew in battle the armies of Eshnuna, Subartu and Gutium... With the “Great Power of Marduk” he overthrew the armies of Sutium, Turukku, Kamu...”

An early target for Hammurabi was the city of Mari, which in 1531 BC (NC) was totally annihilated.

The scale of the destruction at Mari confirms the textual account of Marduk’s powerful weapon. It also provides a clue to the power behind the independence movement, for Mari was a city that had long been associated with Inanna.

The signs therefore suggest that Marduk was faced by a renewed threat from Inanna - not just from Mari, but also from her new kingdom of Mycenae in the north.

 

Catastrophe on Crete
In approximately 1450 BC, a major catastrophe simultaneously struck all of the cities on the island of Crete.

The beautiful palaces at Knossos, Phaistos and Kato Zakro were utterly destroyed. The towns which had been powerful centers of international trade for five hundred years were burned to the ground.

The scale of destruction was so great and so widespread that archaeologists have searched in vain for a powerful natural phenomenon as a cause. The mystery is summed up by The Times Atlas of World History, which admits quite frankly: “the cause of this havoc is unknown”. Some experts, however, have reluctantly come to the conclusion that the fiery destruction of Crete was indeed the work of human hands.

The National Geographic Society admits that “the evidence now points to conquest by the warlike Mycenaeans of the Greek mainland”. This half-hearted attempt to pin the blame on Mycenae is a perfect demonstration of the uncertainty which surrounds this dark age of human history. Clearly it must have been the Mycenaeans, but no-one can explain why they carried out such a violent act of state vandalism.

Can the history of the Gods provide us with the missing historical context? As mentioned earlier, the Mycenaeans worshipped the bare-breasted Goddess, Inanna.

She was an Enlilite and a rival of the Enkiite Gods. Could Crete have previously been an Enkiite stronghold? The evidence in favour of such a hypothesis can be seen in the new Cretan religion which portrayed a bare-breasted Goddess holding two serpents. Figure 54, an example from Knossos, graphically symbolizes Inanna’s victory on Crete against the Enkiite serpent Gods.

As for Inanna’s motive, the destruction of Mari by Hammurabi is an obvious contender, but was there a further motive? The Cretan/Minoan culture has left us a possible clue in one of the most powerful legends of the ancient world - the tale of the Minotaur. This half-man, half-bull was supposedly the offspring of a bull from the wife of King Mines.

However, if we recognize the symbol of the bull as that of an Enlilite God, then the tale may represent the imprisonment in a labyrinth, not of a Minotaur, but of an illegitimate flesh-and-blood God.

The Greek tale of Theseus and the Minotaur includes an account of the burning of the King’s palace, suggesting that this story may have originated with the destruction of the Minoan palaces c. 1450 BC.

Although the tale has been embellished to describe a mythical creature, it may have its roots in an assault by Inanna to rescue an imprisoned God.

 

Massacre at Mohenjo-daro
At around the same time that Crete was destroyed by Inanna, Mohenjo-daro, the capital city of her Indus Valley civilization, suffered a mysterious catastrophe.

Seventy years of archaeology have shed little light on the history of Mohenjodaro. It is widely agreed that this city, along with others in the Indus Valley, suffered a progressive decline after 2000 BC, due to a series of floods. Its final downfall, however, came suddenly.

According to the National Geographic Society:

    “Skeletons scattered in the streets during its final stage... suggest that the final blow to the city was delivered by invaders.”

The foremost authority on the Indus civilization, Sir Mortimer Wheeler, came to a similar conclusion:

    “Looking back on the macabre scene we may perhaps conclude that, since seventeen of these skeletons seem definitely to belong to the latest occupation and the remainder present the same aspect.., we have here in fact the vestiges of a final massacre, after which Mohenjo-daro ceased to exist.”

Who carried out the “final massacre”?

Wheeler suggested it was the Aryans, but according to my reading of events the Indus were the people who became the Aryans! Furthermore, all of the archaeologists have confirmed the lack of any foreign occupation of Mohenjo-daro, together with the lack of any assault on the city of Harappa, 350 miles to the north. In 1979, David Davenport and Ettore Vincenti published a major clue to the Mohenjo-daro mystery.

Davenport and Vincenti were intrigued by the thousands of so-called “black stones” which littered the site. When they analyzed these “stones”, they turned out to be fragments of pottery, fused together by extreme heat. According to their updated calculations, these clay vessels had been briefly exposed to a blast of heat measuring between 1400-1600 degrees centigrade! Davenport and Vincenti then studied the site of Mohenjo-daro in some depth, and pinpointed three distinct waves of devastation which had spread out up to one mile from the epicenter of the explosion.

According to their conclusions, the only reason archaeologists did not find far more skeletons at Mohenjo-daro was the intense heat which had vaporized anyone standing near the epicenter. When did the destruction of Mohenjo-daro occur? Archaeologists’ best estimates suggest a date of around 1500 BC, the same time at which Harappa too was finally deserted. By then, the cities of the Indus were already in severe decline, so why would anyone bother to destroy Mohenjo-daro?

The only logical answer comes from the rivalry between Inanna and Marduk and the events on Crete. The singling out of Mohenjo-daro is highly suggestive of a limited tactical retaliatory strike. Just like two modern super-powers, a full exchange of weapons made no sense for the divine powers of ancient times.

 

A New Wave of Migration
The conquests of Hammurabi, the conflagration on Crete and the destruction of Mohenjo-daro set in motion a fascinating chain of events that no-one, to my knowledge, has yet unravelled.

All of these events coincided, c. 1500 BC, with the rescue of the Olmecs from Easter Island, the emergence of various cultures in the Andes, and possibly the first arrival of the Maya in Mesoamerica.

First, I would like to deal with the most straightforward migrations from Crete to the coast of the Levant. The Hebrew scriptures state that the Philistines - the avowed enemies of Israel - were the remnant from the coasts of Caphtor. Scholars generally identify Caphtor with Crete, and in particular with the name keftiou, given by the Egyptians to the Cretans. It was thus from Crete that the Philistines emigrated to the coastal plains of Canaan, and it is believed that this migration occurred c. 1500 BC, coinciding with the conflagration on Crete.

Who were these Philistines and what role did they play on Crete? Being from Caphtor makes them Caphtorim only in a geographical and not a racial sense. Similarly, being called Philistines may also indicate a geographical reference, since Genesis 10 records an earlier line of people called Philistines who gave their name to the land of Palestine. It is for these reasons that the Philistines are generally considered to have been from Indo-European rather than Hamitic stock. If so, then the Philistines were related to the Hurrians, and we can guess that their role on Crete was that of traders.

Archaeological and textual evidence indicates that the Philistine immigrants into Canaan were well-organized, militarily strong and commercially astute - all characteristics of an Indo-European elite. The Phoenicians too are thought to have originated from Crete. Their name comes from phoi-nix meaning “date palm”, and was applied by the Greeks to distinguish this great sea-faring people from the other Canaanites.

The Phoenicians settled to the north of the Philistines, along the coast of modern-day Lebanon, where they founded important trading cities such as Sidon and Tyre. Sidon was their first city, and indicates their Hamitic tribal origin from Sidon, the first-born son of Canaan. We shall now travel across the globe and examine the migrations which occurred into the Americas, also c. 1500 BC. All of these migrations occurred on the west coast, and we must therefore look to an origin from the Indus or Mesopotamian regions.

The former would have been fleeing the destruction from Mohenjo-daro, whilst the latter would have been either driven out by Hammurabi or voluntarily escaping the strains of over-population. Where did the migrants land in the Americas?

Archaeologists have highlighted 1500 BC as a crucial period in South America, when advanced settlements emerged as if from nowhere.

Alan Kolata has described an “explosion” in Titicacan culture at this time, whilst on the Peruvian coast a huge palace was built by a previously unknown culture at Sechin.

Archaeologists also date to this time the site of Chavin de Huantar in Peru and the appearance of the Olmecs in Mesoamerica.

The mystery of this sudden and widespread change was noted by Professor Waiter Krickeberg:

    “The oldest American high civilizations appear on the scene suddenly, apparently without roots or preliminary stages, for example the Olmec culture in Mesoamerica and the Chavin culture in the Andes. This remarkable phenomenon can probably only be satisfactorily explained if we postulate one or more external impulses which affected ancient America.”

As I explained in the last chapter, the Olmecs and Chavin cultures were the result of a rescue from Easter Island, and were thus a by-product of the wave of migration.

Who were their mysterious rescuers? Of the many interesting South American legends, one happens to confirm Alan Kolata’s comment on the cultural explosion at Titicaca.

The legend concerns a King Atau, who arrived by sea with two hundred men and women, and marched from Rimac to Lake Titicaca. A related legend recalls that invaders arrived at Titicaca and slaughtered the white men whom they found there. And the Uru Indians who live at Lake Titicaca still maintain a tradition that their ancestors were seized by invaders and used for sacrifice; according to the Uru, this occurred some time “before the Sun was hidden”. i.e. before 1390 BC.

Finally, we should not ignore a similar external impulse which affected Australasia c. 1500 BC. Since this continent is situated on the easterly sea route to South America (prior to crossing the Pacific Ocean), it can be no coincidence that it experienced a wave of colonization by a sophisticated group of people at this time.

 

Yahweh’s Secret Identity
Having dated the catastrophes at Crete and Mohenjo-daro to c. 1450 BC, the timing of the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt, in 1433 BC (see Appendix A), now takes on a new significance.

Can a proper historical context of the Gods help us to understand why one God, named Yahweh, went to the assistance of the Hebrews?

The meaning of the name Yahweh (sometimes pronounced Jehovah) has puzzled theologians for thousands of years - so much so that the Jewish Publication Society now leaves the name untranslated, with the footnote “meaning of the Hebrew uncertain”. This is not a true statement, however, because the meaning of the Hebrew “ehyeh ashar ehyeh” is actually quite clear - it literally means “I am who I am”.

As Karen Armstrong has suggested, in common parlance it equates to mind your own business! Why was Yahweh so evasive about his identity, and what were his motives in leading the Israelites out of captivity into the Sinai desert! A review of Near East politics at 1433 BC can answer both of these questions.

Shortly after the destruction of Crete, severe over-crowding afflicted the Levant coast, following the immigration of Phoenicians and Philistines. Archaeological excavations at Byblos have confirmed a massive destruction of that city c. 1450 BC (NC), followed by severe over-population.

The Byblos experience was repeated all along the coast, and was to prompt the movement into Egypt of the mysterious “Hyksos” people, who would rule northern Egypt for two hundred years. The Israelites were about to become embroiled in an all-out war for the Nile delta. Yahweh therefore acted to urgently move the Israelites into the only available safe haven - the Sinai desert an area which was generally considered off-limits, due to the lingering fear of radioactive contamination.

Was this evacuation part of the earlier covenant with Abraham - a payback for his espionage activities - or was there more to it?

Yahweh’s plan certainly went far beyond saving the Israelites. It is possible to deduce, from his emphasis of the ten commandments and the detailed new laws set out in Exodus 20-23, that he was disaffected with mankind. In particular, it would seem that Yahweh was disgusted at the worship of idols and the widespread use of divination. His actions suggest a desire to return to the traditional values, from the earliest days of Sumer. But times had changed.

The earliest Sumerians had been quite innocent and trusting in the Gods who had always protected them. Now, after one thousand years of chaos and warfare, the people were confused, uncertain and superstitious. The only way forward for Yahweh was to create a new covenant of trust and a loyalty to one God alone. It was for that reason that he took the Israelites into a forty year isolation in the Sinai desert.

Only in that way could he bring forth a new generation that was untainted by the polytheism of the Egyptians. Only through monotheism could men recapture their long-lost golden age. Now let us return to the name Yahweh, with all its evasive connotations.

A close reading of the Book of Exodus indicates that Yahweh was following a carefully executed plan, which had three further objectives beyond the simple release of the Israelites. The first of these objectives was to weaken Egypt so fundamentally as a world power that it could not rise up and challenge the new monotheistic kingdom.

The second objective, by Yahweh’s own admission, was to build a reputation that would frighten Israel’s enemies. And the third objective was to win the sympathy and/or fear of the Egyptian people, in order to acquire silver and gold.

These precious metals were required to build the Ark and the Tabernacle, the essential means by which Yahweh would communicate to his chosen people. In order to achieve all of these objectives, it was necessary to gradually escalate the scale of the “plagues” on Egypt. And in order to play this psychological game successfully, it was essential that the Egyptian pharaoh did not recognize the name, and hence the reputation, of the God who opposed him.

Pharaoh’s ignorance of the divine name Yahweh caused him to dismiss the threats of the Israelites. If he had recognized his true enemy, the game would not have been played out to its conclusion. As it was, Pharaoh persistently ignored the increasing desolation that was being inflicted upon his country. By the time this psychological game was over, Egypt had lost most of its livestock, most of its crops and fruit trees and even most of its first-born children.

The Egyptians were then so incensed that they chased after the fleeing Israelites and lost six hundred of their finest chariots, which were swept away by the sea. There was another powerful reason why Yahweh did not disclose his real name. Let us suppose that Yahweh was indeed a major God, well-known in the Near East.

If that God wanted to make a fresh start by reintroducing traditional values via a monotheistic kingdom, then the worst thing he could do would be to retain his old name, especially if he was already worshipped under that name by the neighboring people. Imagine the reaction of the Israelites, upon entering Canaan, to find their special God being worshipped by their enemies, as one of many Gods!

And which of those enemies would fear the Israelites, if the Hebrew God was one of their own Gods! What was the name of the most commonly worshipped deity in the region of Canaan. Although Inanna was worshipped there as Astarte, and an unknown God was worshipped as Dagon, the most prominent God was certainly Hadad, who many believe to be identical with Baal.

The popularity of Hadad is evident from the common usage of his name by various kings - for example, Ben-Hadad of the Aramaeans, Hadad the Edomite and Hadadezer, the enemy of David, to name but a few. In addition, the main deity of the Hurrians, who held prominent positions in the Levant, was Hadad under the name Teshub.

And finally, the Hittites, who had a strong presence in Canaan, were also big devotees of Teshub. The most powerful deity in the Israelites’ promised land was definitely the Storm God.

Now let us follow the clues as to the real identity of Yahweh.

Our first port of call is Exodus 6, which states:

    God also said to Moses. “I am the Lord. I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob as El Shaddai, but by my name Yahweh I did not make myself known to them."

The above passage is confirmed by the Bible’s account of the earlier meeting with Abraham:

    When Abraham was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared before him and said: I am El Shaddai, walk before me and be blameless. I will confirm my covenant between me and you and will greatly increase your numbers.

These passages leave no doubt that the name Yahweh was first used during the Exodus.

There is no basis whatsoever for religious claims that the name Yahweh existed at the time of the covenant with Abraham, the Flood, Adam and Eve, or even at the creation of heaven and Earth. These represent a rather predictable attempt at retrospective monotheistic editing. What is the meaning of Yahweh’s earlier name of El Shaddai?

The word shaddai is stated in the plural and is usually translated as “omnipotent” in the sense of a divine level of excellence, befitting of the plural Elohim. In recent years, however it has become apparent that its root is the Akkadian word shadu, which means mountains. Therefore El Shaddai should not be translated as God Almighty, but more accurately (and indeed literally) as “God of the Mountains”.

Does this provide a clue to Yahweh’s real identity?

There was indeed a God in the Sumerian pantheon who was known as a God of mountains. His name was ISH.KURI the youngest son of Enlil, and his name literally meant “He of the Far Mountain Lands." As we discussed in chapter 14, Ishkur was also known by the name Adad, or Hadad in Hebrew.

Since Hadad/Teshub was the pre-eminent God in Canaan, a new monotheistic religion under the name Ishkur or Adad would have been a non-starter. Ishkur is thus a perfect match for the mountain God El Shaddai, who by necessity became the anonymous God Yahweh. In the previous chapter, we identified Ishkur’s mountain lands as the Taurus and later the Andes Mountains, and noted that he returned from Tiwanaku to the Near East c. 2200 BC.

He was thus in the right place at the right time to appear as El Shaddai at Sodom and Gomorrah in 2024 BC. At that time, his elder brother Nannar/Sin was the God ruling over the Third Dynasty of Ur.

Does the Biblical character of Yahweh match that of Ishkur?

        First, as an Enlilite God, Ishkur fits the bill for the Biblical God, who was anti-Babylon, anti-Egypt and anti-Marduk. Ishkur was, under his various names, consistently represented as the Storm God, with his famous symbol of the thunderbolt, trident or forked lightning. This symbolism is remarkably consistent with the manner in which Yahweh caused Egypt to release the Israelites:

            “When Moses stretched out his staff towards the sky, the Lord sent thunder and hail, and lightning flashed down to the ground.”

        This was no ordinary storm, but the worst ever experienced in Egypt, pre-arranged to strike at an exact time. A similarly phenomenon was used to enable Samuel to defeat the Philistines:

            “But that day the Lord thundered with loud thunder against the Philistines and threw them into such a panic that they were routed before the Israelites.”

        Secondly, both Ishkur and Yahweh were emotional Gods with a violent streak. Ishkur was identified in chapter 14 as the Weeping God of Tiwanaku. Yahweh was also a highly emotional God, a jealous God by his own admission, who quickly lost his temper.

        During the Exodus, Yahweh often threatened to destroy his own people:

            “But I will not go with you, because you are a stiff-necked people and I might destroy you on the way.”

        Both Yahweh and Ishkur were occasionally prone to violence. On some occasions, Yahweh ordered disobedient followers to be put to death, whilst on other occasions he sent fire or a plague to consume the grumbling Israelites. Ishkur could similarly be incited to violence. His cult symbol was the bull, which was feared throughout South America as a sign of death and destruction.

        Certain South American legends describe a day when terror came from the skies, when “wild animals” overran mankind - an incident which I will later connect with Ishkur. In summary, we have a perfect match between Ishkur and Yahweh. We also have an understanding (after several thousand years of waiting), of the reason for the anonymous name I Am Who I Am and furthermore, we have a good understanding of Yahweh’s motives.

        Here we have the youngest son of Enlil, whose Tiwanakan followers had scattered, returning to find his original lands in Anatolia occupied by the Hittites. Here we have a God who never had a permanent city and people to call his own, returning to find his name being misused and abused by a bunch of soothsayers and idol-worshippers.

        And finally, to remove any last vestige of doubt, we can explain why the Lord said to Moses “no-one may see me and live” and why only Yahweh’s glory was ever seen.

            The first reason Yahweh’s face could not be seen was to prevent the Israelites from recording his image and hence exposing his secret identity to their enemies.

            And the second, more practical, reason was that he was absent on business elsewhere.

        lshkur was, after all, a God of the Americas, and the presence of his Storm God image at Teotihuacan (c. 1390 BC) demonstrates his continuing presence in that region at the time of the Exodus.

This absence explains why the Ark of the Covenant was built and used for communications in the Sinai desert from 1433-1393 BC.

It is time that we used our twentieth century eyes to recognize that Yahweh spoke to Moses through a radio transmitter. Unlike the Omnipresent Spiritual God, flesh-and-blood Gods cannot be in two places at the same time!

Back to Jehovah - Yahweh - YHWH - Adonai

 

Absent Gods
Thus far, we have seen striking physical evidence of the continuing presence of the Gods on Earth c. 1500 BC.

The cataclysmic destruction’s at Crete and Mohenjodaro can be dated to around 1450 BC, whilst Hammurabi’s earlier destruction of Mari (1531 BC NC) should perhaps also be included on this list of divinely inspired disasters.

Shortly thereafter, in 1433 BC, the Gods intervention becomes obvious once again, through the technological aspects of the Exodus. The reality of Yahweh’s intervention at that time is clear from references to the “pillar of fire” that led the Israelites, the smoke and fire of the landing on Mount Sinai, and the powerful communications device known as the Ark of the Covenant.

However, it is of crucial importance that Yahweh himself was not physically present during the Exodus and continued to be absent as the Israelites entered the “promised land” of Canaan. During this time, the fourteenth century BC, Yahweh always relayed any instructions via the Ark, and any physical interventions were carried out on his behalf by divine emissaries - the so-called “angels” of the Bible.

These angels were not mythical or ethereal entities but flesh-and-blood walking, talking beings of a subsidiary status to the higher Gods. The wings with which they were commonly depicted in later times represented artistic interpretations of their mode of transport. These “angels” assisted the Israelites, led by Joshua, in their partial conquest of the Canaanite lands, beginning with the defeat of Jericho c. 1390 BC.

The collapse of Jericho’s walls is an event now confirmed by archaeology, and may well be the result of another divine technology which was described in non-technological language as a “trumpet blast”. Yahweh’s instructions to the Israelites had been to mercilessly wipe out the inhabitants of the conquered lands, and the reasoning behind this can be seen from the problems which were encountered soon after Joshua’s death, when the Israelites began to inter-marry with their enemies.

This practice quickly led to the worship of other Gods, in blatant disregard of Yahweh’s first and second commandments, resulting in a premature end for Ishkur/Yahweh’s monotheistic experiment. The lands of the Philistines, Canaanites, Sidonians and Hivites all remained unconquered. During the time that Yahweh/Ishkur acted as the absent God of the Israelites, it is noticeable that other Gods, too, were absent from the affairs of mankind.

The promiscuous Goddess Inanna, for example, usually inspired a tell-tale legacy of bare-breasted statues wherever she went, bur after Crete the trail goes cold. Similarly, it would seem that her rival, Marduk, had also withdrawn from the scene. Marduk’s Egyptian homeland, once a mighty power, was left weak and vulnerable by Yahweh’s escalating series of “plagues”, and the northern delta was occupied soon afterwards by an invading force of “Hyksos”.

Conventionally, we know little about these Hyksos, the only clue being their name which literally means “chieftains of a foreign hill country”. According to my analysis, however, they were almost certainly Hurrians of Indo-European descent, driven south by over-population in the Levant. The fact that these Hyksos kings subjugated Egypt for around two hundred years is crucial, because it suggests that Marduk and his clan were not physically present to expel them. Meanwhile, Marduk’s city of Babylon, in Mesopotamia, was also left surprisingly defenseless.

At the same time that his Egyptian lands were being subjugated by the Hyksos, the vital city of Babylon, for which Marduk had fought so hard, was attacked in a surprise raid. The Hittite king Mursilis carried off its treasures, including the solid gold statues of Marduk and his spouse Sarpanit. The reaction to this sacrilegious act suggests an indirect intervention by Marduk, for Babylon was immediately repossessed by the Kassites, a mysterious people who suddenly swept down from the Zagros Mountains.

In the conventional chronology, this occurred in 1595 BC and the Kassites ruled the Near East for a long era of 438 years. This length of reign is in apparent contradiction to the negligible cultural impact of the Kassites.

Under David Rohl’s new chronology, however, the puzzlement of the scholars can be resolved, for the event occurred c. 1250 BC and the Kassites ruled for less than a century.

The origin and motivation of these Kassites has always perplexed the historians, for they made no changes to Babylonian culture (which they were supposed to have conquered), but simply maintained the status quo. As we have seen, however, these Kassites were almost certainly ex-miners from Tiwanaku, and the Negroid element were racially loyal to Marduk. These Kassites were not “invading” Babylon, but rather occupying it, presumably on the instructions of the absent Marduk.

The weakness of Babylon prompted a major change in the political balance of the eastern lands. A growing threat began to emerge from the Assyrians, who under Shalmeneser I established Nimrud as their new capital and set up a military post at the ruined site of Mari c. 1250 BC. The Elamites too were recovering from their annihilation by Hammurabi, as evidenced by the construction of a superb ziggurat at Choga Zanbil, dedicated to their God Inshushinak, also c. 1250 BC.

These Elamites began to make successful raids into Babylonia and c. 1170 BC sacked Babylon itself, together with the city of Aqar Quf, which the Kassites had built just to the north. Meanwhile, Egypt began to experience a renaissance, with the 18th Dynasty pharaohs successfully expelling the Hyksos c. 1183 BC (NC).

The first pharaoh of that dynasty was called Ahmose - a name which means “from the God Ahemanated”. Ahmose was followed by successors who bore the name Thutmose, meaning “from the God Thoth emanated”. These two Gods were one and the same since Ah signified the Moon God, which Thoth most certainly was. Whilst it is possible to read into this Egyptian renaissance a physical intervention by Thoth, there is no hard evidence to support such a conclusion.

Indeed, it should be recalled that Thoth was a pacifist God, a God of balance, who did not take sides in the disputes between the Gods. If Thoth had been allowed to intervene to redress the damage caused by Ishkur in 1433 BC, it would surely have happened much earlier than the twelfth century BC. It seems more likely that the 18th Dynasty pharaohs were calling upon an absent God and expelled the Hyksos by their own efforts.

The overall conclusion from the available evidence is that, during the period 1450-1000 BC, the Gods had withdrawn from the Near East (the Old World) and gone to the Americas (the New World) where there are signs of divine activity at Teotihuacan c. 1390 BC. The lack of direct intervention in the Old World suggests that Marduk, Inanna and Yahweh (Ishkur) were all side-lined by a deliberate policy of non-interference.

Could it be that, in the aftermath of the escalating conflict which had destroyed the Cretan palaces and Mohenjo-daro, the olden Gods had brought the younger, warring Gods to heel?

 

The Temple of Jerusalem
After a fifty-year period of worshipping Thoth, the Egyptian pharaohs once again began to call upon the name of Amen (Marduk).

There is nothing, however, to suggest that Amen was physically present. On the contrary, in 1022 BC (NC) a remarkable thing happened. After three years on the throne, the pharaoh Amenhotep IV suddenly changed his name to Akhenaten and made a revolutionary conversion to monotheism.

During Akhenaten’s reign, all references to the God Amen ceased, and were replaced by “DINGIR.A", thought to represent the worship of Aten, the solar disc. Our understanding of this remarkable period in history is assisted by the so called “Amama Letters”, which were exchanged between Akhenaten and his allies in Gath, Ashkelon Gaza, Ashdod, Ekron, Jerusalem and the Kassite city Kar Duniash.

These were the cities of the Philistines - Indo-Europeans who were ruling the Levant from their confederacy of city states. The closeness of this alliance is demonstrated by Akhenaten taking among his wives both a Hurrian, named Tadu-Hepa, and a daughter of the Kassite king Burnaburiash II. This back-door attempt by the Philistines to conquer Egypt via Akhenaten would last only thirteen years. Tutankhamen then reversed the policies of Akhenaten and denounced him as a heretic. During this brief period, however, the power balance of the Levant was substantially changed.

Prior to Akhenaten, Egypt had embarked on a policy of defensive expansionism, and had forged a successful alliance with the Hurrians. Now, the Levant had become a battlefield between the Philistines and a roaming army of bandits known as the “Habiru’’. As David Rohl has so convincingly demonstrated, these well-organized Habiru of the Amarna Letters were led by David - the future king of the Israelites and, most significantly, the future conqueror of Jerusalem.

Who was occupying the site of Jerusalem prior to its conquest by David?

According to the Amarna Letters, the inhabitants were the Jebusites, and their king was allied to Akhenaten and the other Philistine rulers. This alliance can be explained by a common Indo-European origin, for the king of Jerusalem was named Abdiheba, meaning “servant of Heba”, who was a Hurrian Goddess.

Furthermore, it can be demonstrated that the Jebusites were one and the same people as the Hyksos! The Egyptian historian Manetho explains that the Hyksos, after they were expelled from Egypt, went and “built a city in a country now called Judaea... and gave it the name Jerusalem”.

According to the Amarna Letters, the Jebusite name for Jerusalem was “Tianna” - a giveaway to their partly Sumerian culture, for the name is so clearly rooted in the Sumerian TI and AN, meaning “Life’’ and “Heaven” - a fitting name for the sacred site of Jerusalem.

Amazingly, the name TI.ANNA echoes the name of Tiwanaku, suggesting that the Jebusites might have been the former supervisors of operations at that site. According to the new chronology, David captured Jerusalem during Akhenaten’s last year, when Egypt was impotent as a military power. Did the God Yahweh have a hand in this conquest? The ease with which David took the city via its water tunnel system does suggest that he had a source of inside information.

Furthermore, it may be significant that, whilst David’s rival King Saul never once called on Yahweh via the Ark of the Covenant, David himself apparently did. In the Book of Samuel I, verse 30, David used a special garment known as an ephod to call the Lord and successfully received a reply. Was the capture of Jerusalem a divinely orchestrated plot? With hindsight, it would seem that the main purpose of the capture of Jerusalem was to build a “temple” for Yahweh.

The detailed plans for that temple, described in Kings I verse 7, are quite mystifying, and suggest to me some obscure technical purpose far beyond a simple altar for the worship of an absent God. The plot thickens when we date the construction of the “temple”, by Solomon. to 953 BC. For in 952 BC (NC), Marduk/Ra reappeared in Egypt! After an absence which I have suggested lasted 450 years, a pharaoh suddenly adopted the name Ramesses, meaning “begotten by Ra”.

He was soon followed in 936 BC (NC) by the most famous pharaoh that ever lived - Ramesses II (Ramesses the Great). And Ramesses the Great’s first task, having driven the Hittites back to Kadesh, was to sack Jerusalem!

This ransacking of the “temple’s treasures” can be dated to 925 BC (NC), just 21 years after the temple was completed. Unless we believe in coincidences, the inevitable conclusion is that Yahweh/Ishkur broke the Gods’ policy of non-interference and was then punished by an equal and opposite intervention by Marduk (via Ramesses).

It is evident from the Bible that the Ark of the Covenant was being used to keep Yahweh up-to-date with events, and it is possible that David’s successful campaigns, facilitated by the political weakening of Egypt under Akhenaten, provided a tantalizing opportunity for him to reassert his authority in the Old World. What better target than Jerusalem, which as the former site of the Gods’ mission control centre, was arguably more sacred than Babylon itself.

 

The Assyrian Mystery
The next major incident in the history of Jerusalem came more than two hundred years later, in 689 BC.

At this time, the Assyrians were masters of the Old World. They had conquered the Babylonians and the Elamites. and had deported the Israelites from their northern kingdom of Samaria.

Meanwhile, the Hurrians had finally packed up and left the Levant for a hopefully more peaceful existence in the north-east, near Lake Van. It seemed as if no-one could withstand the onslaught of the Assyrians’ military might, which would soon come to its peak with a brutal invasion of Egypt under Esarheddon and later by his successor Ashurbanipal.

Who were the Assyrians and why did they suddenly pursue such a vicious programme of expansionism?

Originally they were migrants from Sumer, and mainly supporters of Inanna. However, that was more than a millennium previously, and their religion was now based on the first holy trinity - a composite God named Asshur, formed of a triad of Anar, Eel and Ea (the Sumerian Anu, Enlil and Enki).

Beneath this triad, the Assyrians worshipped a secondary triad of Sin, Shamash and either Ramman or Ishtar. The Assyrians’ belief in an ancient trinity of Gods from Sumer suggests that they were not being supported by the direct intervention of any specific God. The absence of the Gods in Assyrian affairs is confirmed by an attempted attack on Jerusalem by the Assyrian king Sennacherib in 689 BC. It was then that Sennacherib made his infamous boast that no God was more powerful than the mighty Assyrian army!

But, no sooner had Sennacherib spoken these words, than the Gods did intervene...

    “That night the angel of the Lord went out and put to death a hundred and eighty-five thousand men in the Assyrian camp.”

Once again it was the emissaries of the Gods, rather than the Gods themselves, who carried out the divine mandate. Could the extermination of the Assyrians, as recorded in the Bible, have been an actual historic event, representing another example of the Gods’ awesome technology?

One important detail suggests that it may have been. Prior to the angel’s attack, the king of Jerusalem had approached the communications device known as the Ark of the Covenant (at this time safely installed inside the “temple” and referred to as “the Lord”), and said:

    “O Lord, God of Israel, enthroned between the cherubim... listen to the words Sennacherib has sent to insult the living God...”

In the same year as his disastrous attack on Jerusalem, Sennacherib faced the latest in a long-running series of rebellions by his appointees in the city of Babylon. This time his soldiers brutally sacked Babylon in an unprecedented manner. However, even this ruthless act of suppression failed to prevent Babylon from bouncing back fifty years later.

It was then that the Assyrian empire suffered a mysterious demise:

    “With the year 639, the sources for Assyrian history cease... No explanation can be given for this curious blackout. With appalling suddenness, the Empire disintegrated.”

Who was behind the fall of Assyria?

The names of the rebellious Babylonian kings provide a clue. The chief instigator of the rebellion was Nabopolassar, who was followed on the throne by his son Nebuchadnezzar, both names signifying the God Nabu, a son of Marduk. Did the Gods intervene to bring the tyranny of the arrogant and barbaric Assyrians to an end? Had the Assyrians pushed the tolerance of the Gods to the limit?

Significantly, one of their last acts, in 640 BC, was to crush the Elamite kingdom (worshippers of Ninurta), having earlier carried out a brutal assault on Egypt (664 BC NC). The Assyrians thus had few allies amongst the Gods.

Until the historians provide some alternative explanations, we must seriously consider the possibility that the divine hand of Nabu was directly or indirectly behind the Assyrians’ sudden demise.

 

Ezekiel and the New Temple
We may never know whether Nabu did provide support to Babylon, but what we do know is that the Babylonians went on to gain control over the rival city of Jerusalem.

In 597 BC, the kings of Jerusalem became Babylonian appointees and the Israelite elite were exiled. This was followed in 586 BC by a major Jewish revolt, which was ruthlessly suppressed by the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar II.

He burned Jerusalem’s “temple”, demolished its buildings and city walls, and carried off its treasures. In the meantime, Nebuchadnezzar brought the city of Babylon to new heights of grandeur, including its famous hanging gardens. It is surprising that the rival Gods allowed Jerusalem and Babylon to experience such contrasting fates.

One of the Israelites deported from Jerusalem to Babylon in 597 BC was a priest named Ezekiel - the same priest whose “visions” of a spacecraft were described in chapter I. The highly technical descriptions provided by Ezekiel testify to the reality of his experiences. In 572 BC, Ezekiel was lifted up by the Lord’s “Spirit” and transported to a “temple”.

Biblical translations give the impression that he was taken to Solomon’s Temple in Jerusalem, but that temple had of course been destroyed fourteen years earlier. In addition, several of the features described by Ezekiel, such as a river running from the temple towards the sea, clearly do not describe the geography of Jerusalem. In fact, a reading of the Biblical text in the original Hebrew makes it quite apparent that Ezekiel was totally unfamiliar with his new surroundings.

So where was the temple to which Ezekiel was taken?

A temple which does match Ezekiel’s description exists at Chavin de Huantar in the Andes! Several scholars have pointed out the amazing series of similarities between Chavin and the Biblical location, most obviously Chavin’s situation on a very high mountain at a height of 10,430 feet. The second similarity is that the temple at Chavin is precisely aligned to the cardinal points of the compass, with its main gate facing east, just as described by Ezekiel.

Finally, Ezekiel observed a river which ran “from under” the threshold of the temple from its south side towards the east, and ultimately onwards to a sea in the east. As described in chapter 3, excavations at Chavin have uncovered a subterranean network of tunnels that were used to divert water from the Wacheqsa river through the site and downwards towards the Mosna river, which closely skirts the sunken plaza on its southern side (see Figure 10).

The latter river then connects to the Puchka, which flows in turn to the Maranon and finally into the Amazon, taking it to a sea in the east, just as described by Ezekiel. The astounding conclusion is that Yahweh was attempting to build in Peru a replica of his “temple” which had been destroyed in Jerusalem fourteen years earlier.

Furthermore, his ambitious plan extended far beyond Chavin, otherwise why would he bring Ezekiel thousands of miles to give him hundreds of precise measurements from the Chavin temple?

Yahweh’s full intentions are quite clearly recorded in Ezekiel verse 43:

    “Son of man, describe the temple to the people of Israel... Let them consider the plan, and if they are ashamed of all they have done, make known to them the design... Write these down before them so that they may be faithful to its design...”

Unless we believe in coincidences, the picture which emerges from this analysis is a dramatic attempt by Ishkur/Yahweh to reassert his authority among the Gods, perhaps prompted by the contrasting fortunes of Jerusalem and Babylon. Did his attempt fail? As far as we know, Ezekiel’s compatriots never succeeded in following his instructions to build a Chavin replica.

As for Chavin itself, whatever might have once existed there may have been destroyed and built over by later constructions dating from the era 500-200 BC. It would be particularly interesting to excavate beneath its sunken plaza. What exactly was the so-called “temple” which Ishkur built at Chavin?

If the Biblical account of the temple of Jerusalem is a guide, then we are dealing not with a temple in any conventional sense, but with some kind of technical construction for a specific purpose. A possible clue is contained in the Raymondi Stele (Figure 45), which is thought to have been carved at Chavin c. 500 BC, when it emerged as a sacred centre not long after Ezekiel’s visit.

The stele shows Ishkur, symbolized by a bull-God, standing beneath what we might now interpret as a stylized rocket...

 

Figure 45

 

Day of the Jaguar
I would now like to focus on the culture, legends and artifacts of the American continent which consistently recollect a ruthless destruction of men by their Gods.

I will attempt to demonstrate that these traditions have their origins in the events at Chavin de Huantar in the sixth century BC. The most famous Aztec artifact is the great “Sun Stone”, found at the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan and now exhibited in the Museum at Mexico City (Plate 61).

 

 

The four rectangular panels which surround the central face are thought to represent the four great periods (or “suns”) of Aztec history.

Each sun is identified by the phenomenon that brought it to an end. According to the Aztec tradition, the first sun was destroyed by water, the second by strong winds, the third by quakes and storms, and the fourth by the jaguar.

The Aztecs considered themselves to be living in the fifth sun, at the beginning of which they had migrated to their present land, led by their God Huitzilpochtli. There have been many attempts to confirm the validity of the Aztec suns, all of which have suffered from conflicting data on the length of each period. Putting this data to one side, the solution to the first three suns strikes me as quite simple.

The first sun was ended by water, thus representing the great Flood in 10983 BC.

The second sun was ended by wind, representing the nuclear destruction in 2024 BC in the lands from which the first Americans came. And the third sun was ended by quakes and storms, representing the cosmic event in 1390 BC that halted the Earth’s rotation and caused massive “hailstones” to crash down from the sky. Aztec traditions maintained that the feathered serpent God, Quetzalcoatl, had arrived near the beginning of the fourth sun, i.e. around 1390 BC.

This is consistent with my hypothesis that the Gods had moved to the New World following the climactic events 1450 BC. Some time after 1390 BC, the fourth sun was ended by the “jaguar”. This tradition is commemorated throughout the Americas in the form of numerous religious cults involving various fanged animals.

Maya priests, for example, were depicted wearing jaguar skins, and one of the most famous priests was called Balam, literally meaning jaguar in the local language. Experts believe that this cult first began at Chavin de Huantar, where according to the National Geographic Society, “the Chavin venerated jaguars and other jungle predators as Gods”.

This cult is indeed depicted in the graphic Chavin representations of ferocious bull-like creatures with snarling teeth, as seen in Figures 9 and 45. The legend of the jaguar is connected chronologically to another legend according to which mankind was over-run by “wild animals” at a time of chaos and warfare between the Gods. This legend of the “wild animals” has been commemorated in numerous enigmatic stone carvings, which have always puzzled the experts.

A particularly good example can be found at El Baul in Guatemala. “Monument 27” at El Baul depicts a figure breathing fire and holding what appear to be grenades in each hand (Figure 55). Its human-like body is joined to a helmeted head, featuring goggles and the snarling face of a wild beast.

At its feet crouches a much smaller figure of a man, making an offering to the jaguar-like beast.

 

Figure 55

 

Close to El Baul, at Santa Lucia Cotzumalhuapa, a similar sacrificial scene has been found on a stele, now in the Berlin Museum.

This stele shows various races of men looking skywards and offering an unidentifiable sacrifice to a diving God. This image of a diving or descending God is commonplace in later Mesoamerican culture, with two Mayan examples being shown in Figure 56.

Although experts dismiss these images as “the setting Sun” or “bee Gods” (seriously!), it seems more likely to symbolize a menacing threat from the skies.

 

 

A similar threat from the skies was depicted at the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan, where archaeologists found two large statues guarding the Temple of the Eagles.

These imposing statues are of frightening bird-men (or Gods), their human faces peering out from inside the beaks of giant eagles. This artistic combination of man and animal (called zoomorphism) crops up again and again in the ancient American cultures. At Quirigua, a Mayan site in southern Guatemala, an outdoor museum contains one of the world’s weirdest collections of carved stones.

The zoomorphic images on these stones also present a third aspect - that of machines.

One visitor to the site has described his impressions.

    “A huge monster of unknown animal origin, with enormous sharp claws, and always with the head or torso of a human being in its mouth, not as though it were devouring the person, but rather it appears that the person is riding in the monster.”

At San Agustin. Columbia, several dozen related sites from an unknown culture are dominated by 320 monolithic stone sculptures.

These sculptures are so horrific that, in 1758, a Franciscan priest branded them “works of the devil”. Fortunately they have survived, and now comprise one of the world’s scariest open-air museums. Many of the statues are two-storeyed, such as Figure 57 which shows a 6-feet high jaguar-man surmounted by a jaguar-bird with fierce teeth.

Elsewhere a terrifying figure sits under a stone roof with a human skull dangling from its neck, whilst many other statues depict monsters feeding small human figures into their mouths!

One text book sums up the scholarly consensus on San Agustin as follows:

    “The most striking sculptures are the statues of humans with feline features, particularly fangs, which have been connected by scholars with jaguar shamanism.”

Another fantastic combination of machine and man was found on the Peruvian coast. A small ceramic figurine from the Moche culture depicts a monstrous looking animal on two legs, with a machine-like chimney on its head (Figure 58).

The monster is shown in the act of decapitating a man, and is typical of numerous similar depictions in this region. The Olmecs of Mesoamerica also appear to have been involved in the attack by wild animals.

Archaeologists believe that the Olmecs practiced a jaguar cult at the site of Teopantecuanitlan, and some authorities refer to them as “the people of the jaguar”. A common aspect of Olmec art was an infantile form with a cleft head and fanged snarling mouth, such as the jade figurine shown in Figure 59.

What are the ancient artists trying to tell us? Did terror literally come from the skies, and did the depictions of “wild animals” represent Gods attacking man with aerial vehicles?

In short, was mankind caught up in a war between the Gods in the Americas?

There is no doubt that both South American and Mesoamerican cultures preserve the records of an Enlilite victory over Enkiite Gods in the relatively recent past.

The national emblem of modern-day Mexico is an eagle grasping a snake with its beak and claw (Figure 60), the snake being an Enkiite symbol. In Maya country, a mask was discovered showing snakes firmly held by the teeth of a jaguar God (Figure 61).

Meanwhile, at the site of San Agustin in central Colombia, one of the most prominent statues is of a stone bird clutching a snake (Figure 62). All of these images provide a strikingly consistent symbolism.

The pyramid at Chichen Itza (Plate 62) also reflects the same symbolism.

 

 

At 5 p.m. on the spring and autumn equinoxes, a shadow moves down the pyramid like the rippling body of a serpent.

Having reached the bottom, it then wriggles its way back to the top. This is thought to symbolize the serpent God descending to Earth and then departing. Meanwhile, inside the pyramid at the top of a flight of narrow stairs, the Toltecs built a small shrine to the jaguar.

A possible interpretation of this is, once again, the superiority of the jaguar over the serpents of the Enkiites.

        When did this war of the Gods occur?

        The fifth Aztec sun, marked by the jaguar, began some time after the fourth sun in 1390 BC, but when exactly?

        Can we link it chronologically to Ishkur/Yahweh, the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem and Ezekiel’s visit to the new temple at Chavin?

Our first clue comes from Aztec legend.

The Aztec war God was known as Huitzilpochtli. He was usually shown holding a powerful weapon and he had, according to one legend, won a battle against four hundred lesser Gods.

Another legend, possibly referring to the same event and the same God, states that a God named “Smoking Mirror” fought the feathered serpent God, Quetzalcoatl, at Tula, just north of Teotihuacan, and thereby brought his reign to an end. Archaeologists excavating at Teotihuacan have found images of the Storm God, Ishkur, everywhere, indicating that he and Huitzilpochtli were one and the same victorious God.

The legend of the Smoking Mirror corresponds with another tale, according to which Quetzalcoatl left Mesoamerica following the outbreak of wars between the Gods. The serpent God set out with a band of followers from Tula towards Yucatan, from where he sailed eastward on a “serpent raft”.

This event is one of the most significant in the history of the Americas, since Quetzalcoatl left with a promise to return. The return date was fixed according to a sacred calendar of 260 days which combined with a 365-day calendar to produce a sacred round of 52 years. Thereafter, all of the Mesoamerican cultures counted the years and awaited the return of Quetzalcoatl every time the 52-year cycle was completed.

Since Quetzalcoatl’s promise is of central importance to the sacred round, it is highly likely that the 260-day sacred calendar (on which the sacred round depended) was set in motion at the date he left. It may therefore be highly significant that the earliest sacred round date yet found in Mexico equates to 500 BC, which suggests that Quetzalcoatl may have left Mesoamerica in 552 BC.

Can it be a coincidence that this date, marking the battle of the Gods, is a mere 18 years after Ezekiel’s trip to Chavin? Our other chronological evidence comes from archaeology.

Whilst the dates are admittedly rather vague, the established chronology for San Agustin and Chavin de Huantar are both entirely consistent with the period around 550 BC, which is the earliest established date for the jaguar cult. This period coincides exactly with a phenomenon known as “El Nine” which caused massive social and cultural changes in South America.

In particular, the Peruvian coastal settlements suddenly declined whilst Chavin, in stark contrast, suddenly arose as a powerful religious centre. Archaeologists are unsure exactly what was behind El Nine, but if we put all of the clues together, then the war of the Gods becomes the force behind El Nine and Chavin de Huantar emerges as the catalyst that started the war of the Gods. How did mankind get caught up in this conflict?

Whilst we cannot be certain, a possible clue appears within the later Chavin temple. As suggested in chapter 3, the EI Lanzon carving has been positioned at the heart of the temple to protect it from an unknown enemy. Furthermore, the walls of the temple are designed to obstruct access for men of large stature. Could this enemy have been a group of the Negroes who arrived at Chavin c. 1450 BC?

According to the pre-Incan legend cited in the previous chapter, “giants” had marched into the mountains, upset their God, and been destroyed. It is possible that these people, close relations of the Olmecs, were forced by Ishkur to build his “temple’, but then subsequently sabotaged it. If that act of sabotage was incited by a rival God, then we can understand why both men and Gods became involved in the ensuing conflict.

This analysis implies that it was Ishkur/Yahweh who unleashed the fury of the “wild animals” upon mankind, an attack which made a long-lasting impression on the survivors.

Among these survivors were almost certainly the ancestors of the Aztecs, the latter being renowned for their bloodthirsty sacrificial rites, which seem so alien to us. We can begin to empathize with the Aztecs, however, when we study one of their ceremonial daggers shown in Plate 60.

This dagger, which was used for cutting out the hearts of their human sacrificial victims, has a handle decorated with the image of the diving Storm God!

 

Another New World Order
Whilst wild animals were over-running man in the Americas, the kingdom of Babylon was on its last knees. Its last ruler, Nabonidos, ascended the throne in 555 BC.

Amid signs of increasing disillusionment. no doubt caused by the continuing absence of the Gods, Nabonido’s declared Nannar/Sin to be the supreme God.

This, however, was no more than a desperate call on an absent God, for Nannar/Sin did not help Babylon to resist the invasion of the Persian army, commanded by Cyrus, in 539 BC. Nor, for that matter, did Marduk or Nabu. The handover of power was suspiciously smooth. Thus began a new phase in the history of mankind. The power of the Sumerians, Babylonians and Assyrians had waned.

Within fourteen years, the pharaonic dynasties in Egypt would also be ended by the Persians. For the first time in history, an empire arose which was neither Hamitic nor Shemitic in race, for both the Persians and the Medes (their subservient allies) were from the tribe of Noah’s third son, Japheth.

When the Persian empire gave way to Alexander the Great in 330 BC, it was again a Japhethite kingdom. And world power has been exercised in the name of Japheth ever since. The age of Cyrus also marked a turning point in world religion.

All of the peoples subdued by Babylon, including the Jews, were allowed to return to the worship of their former Gods and rebuild their temples. Cyrus thus encouraged a new age of paganism, based on the idols of Gods who had not been seen for a thousand years. All of these Gods, however, were made subservient to AhuraMazda, the “God of Truth and Light”. who was depicted as a deity of heaven rather than of Earth.

This new era of religious freedom paved the way for the emergence of powerful new religions, which represented a unique experience for mankind. In the period 550-500 BC, idol worship began to fall out of favour and some of the world’s greatest thinkers began to seek a higher spiritual realm, promoting new ideals such as peace and compassion.

The influence of Buddha in India and Confucius in China, during this period, cannot be understated.

It is noteworthy that Buddha regarded the Gods as mere flesh-and-blood beings who were not to be worshipped, since they were caught up in the same problems as mankind; he thus sought a spiritual enlightenment, or nirvana, that was higher than the Gods.

        Is it a coincidence that all of these political and religious changes occurred in the direct aftermath of the war of the Gods on the opposite side of the world?

        Could the serpent God, who was forced to leave the Americas in 552 BC, have had something to do with these changes?

The evidence suggests that the serpent God was Enki and that he did indeed return to the continent of Asia.

Enki’s nickname Ea meant “He Whose Home is Water”. Scholars believe that he can also be identified with the mythical Oannes, an amphibious “fish-man” who emerged from the Erythrean Sea and taught civilization to the Sumerians.

The presence of Enki in Mesoamerica can be determined from the Mayan word “uaana”, which is virtually identical to Oannes and means “He Whose Home is Water". Just Off the Yucatan coast, from where Quetzalcoatl allegedly left Mesoamerica, there lies an island named Jaina. The Itzas, a people who occupied that region in later times (and gave their name to Chichen Itza), recognized Jaina as the final resting place of Itzamna, the God of the Itzas. The meaning of Itzamna was, once again, “He Whose Home is Water”.

According to legend, Quetzalcoatl (alias Ea/Enki) sailed away from Jaina and went eastwards on a “serpent raft”. The same serpent raft and the same God turn up in the east, c. 500 BC, at a sacred site called Budhanilkantha in Nepal! Plate 63 shows the statue of a God, known as “the Sleeping Vishnu”, lying on a bed of snakes inside a water tank.

This statue is a mystery, even to experts on Hindu religion, since it bears all the hallmarks of the God Vishnu, and yet the name Budhanilkantha means “Old Blue Throat”, a name signifying a different God, Shiva.

This presents the experts with a strange contradiction, since Vishnu is the preserver and Shiva the destroyer. Whatever this duality signifies, the statue on the raft of snakes is definitely Vishnu, and that God is also commonly known in Nepal as “Narayan”.

The name Narayan means “the one who looks after the people”, and one of his nicknames was, amazingly, “He Whose Home is Water”! It would thus seem that Enki (and possibly his clan) were forced to leave South America c. 550 BC and consequently returned to Asia.

In the light of this dramatic relocation, it is quite possible that the Enkiite Gods decided to rid the Near East of the rival Shemitic and Hamitic powers which had fought so bitterly for 1,500 years, by bringing about a new world order through a Japhethite empire.

 

Chapter Fifteen Conclusions

        An escalating conflict between Marduk and Inanna caused the destruction of Mari, Crete and Mohenjo-daro c. 1450 BC. This conflict brought about large-scale migrations, particularly to the Americas. The Gods, too, decided to relocate to the New World and agreed a policy of non-interference in the Old World.

        Yahweh, the God of the Old Testament, was a flesh-and-blood God, known to the Sumerians as Ishkur. He broke the policy of non-interference by attempting to build a new monotheistic kingdom via the Israelites in Canaan.

        Ishkur/Yahweh used King David to reacquire Jerusalem, the site of the old mission control centre. The “temple” which was built at Jerusalem in 953 BC was not a temple in the conventional sense. It was destroyed by Ramesses on the instructions of Marduk.

        Ezekiel was flown to Yahweh’s new “temple” at Chavin de Huantar in 572 BC. Ishkur’s plans for Chavin and a further duplicate of that temple elsewhere were thwarted by an incident at Chavin which led to a war of the Gods in the Americas c. 550 BC.

        As a result of the war, one group of Gods relocated to Asia and may have conspired to bring about a new world order in 539 BC.

Back to Contents