Apocalypse Pre-Preteri?

[Richard Stanley]

The following screengrab is taken from the subsequent video, Part 3 of a Sitchin production focusing on Mesopotamian/Egyptian roots of the cyclical End Times phenomenon, that I am approaching from the opposite direction (i.e. the present backwards). Naturally, these presentations then incorporate Sitchin's (rather impressive and mostly coherent IMHO, and rather scary if true) interpretation of the Mesopotamian texts as talking about anthropomorphic gods and goddesses as our historical overlords. And, also BTW, form a huge input to the Old Testament and the New, much laundered of the original polytheism, although one can easily see the connections, such as the origins of the Jewish month, Nissan, and Abraham's origins.

In any case, note the year mentioned below, 2160 BCE, a complete zodiacal age worth of time, till the supposed Christian Year of the Lord (actually 1 CE or AD). In the series is discussed the origins of the Precessional Zodiac in Sumeria, which Sitchin claims formed a celestial clock to inform the clashing brotherly gods who turn it was to rule. Remember here that Revelation tells us that there is alternating millenniums for Christ and (his brother) Satan (the Egyptian Set).

Naturally, I must research what is said about this date by others, as Sitchin claims, but generally this time is about the time of the collapse of the Indus Valley Culture, which had close connections to Sumeria. Approximately 1,000 years later is the collapse of the Late Bronze Age, of which only Egypt survives intact, albeit weakened.



Part 3:

Part 1:

Part 2:

 

[Jerry Russell]

Naturally, these presentations then incorporate Sitchin's (rather impressive and mostly coherent IMHO, and rather scary if true) interpretation of the Mesopotamian texts as talking about anthropomorphic gods and goddesses as our historical overlords.

I don't understand why we can't see these Mesopotamian "anthropomorphic gods" as being more or less equivalent to the later anthropomorphic gods of the Egyptians, Greeks and Hebrews. That is, they are simply the earthly kings, priests & nobles, projected onto a grand stage and endowed with supernatural powers, because of the propaganda benefits of such representations.

As to the idea that these gods were extraterrestrial visitors: can I object, first, that there is absolutely no evidence that isn't explained equally well by the idea that the ancient artists had vivid imaginations? And furthermore, I have a problem with the proposed explanations for the motives of the ET's. What possible benefits could the ET's derive by enslaving the primitive earthlings? Labor requirements in gold mines, seriously??

 

[Richard Stanley]

Yes, you may object Jerry. Though, you must realize that this makes you rather objectionable. ...

My main point in presenting the material was not to ask anyone to accept Sitchin's underlying thesis about space aliens, but I find all the peripheral interpretations and factoids rather useful. This has always been our operating basis, to look at various interpretations and take what seems plausible and reject the rest.

As such, I find the interpretation of Set's and Horus' conflict very useful, and doesn't have to depend upon Sitchin's alien approach. Also, the very clear zodiacal nature that underlies the tableau, at an age most will not admit to it being known. Also, the slave status that the elite gods and demigods have towards humanity. And that he is claiming that the mainstream is claiming that equivalent violent social changes were occur at a date that I see as millennial. This doesn't depend on Planet X or not.

There are indeed some troubling narrative aspects to the Sitchin approach. For one, despite Horus and Seth (and Marduk vs. Enlil) having this raging battle against each other, they both get called to a council of the gods to resolve matters for other gods peacefully. This seems rather incongruent, and also that Anu seems to have been rather inept to manage his offspring. Rather like Trump and the Keystone Cops in some respects it seems.

However, one might interpret the dialectic of these warring gods as somewhat Machiavellian, as our thinking about the False Dialectic of Western Civilization. Like, who gave these Jews and elite gentils this crazy idea in the first place? You always need to have an enemy or a foil to distract attention away from your own agenda, that's why. And if you don't have a natural enemy, then you have to create one. Now Tamar, go play a street prostitute to entice poor Judah into starting a new family (after God kills poor Onan).

In any case, the Vatican says that Space Jesus .... might indeed come from outer space. And like Trump, the Anunnaki want our gold Jerry (to save Nibiru, and who can begrudge them that now). Perhaps this is why the central bank hoards can't be properly accounted for.

Beyond that, the ancient texts, including the Bible and the apocryphal texts, have some rather difficult material to summarily dismiss.

 

[Jerry Russell]

In any case, the Vatican says that Space Jesus .... might indeed come from outer space. And like Trump, the Anunnaki want our gold Jerry (to save Nibiru, and who can begrudge them that now). Perhaps this is why the central bank hoards can't be properly accounted for.

You are making my point for me here. If the central bank hoards can't be accounted for, and Trump and the Vatican are saying the Anunnaki have taken it to save Nibiru, then it's our job to be the voice in the wilderness questioning the mainstream narrative.

 

[Richard Stanley]

Yes, but I at least have to bring up the subject Jerry, so that we can have this discussion. Whether it is questioning the mainstream of the offstream.

 

[Jerry Russell]

Yes, but I at least have to bring up the subject Jerry, so that we can have this discussion.

True. Without new grist for the mill, I would probably lapse into contemplation of the ultimate wisdom I have achieved in my own mind, and never need to post anything.

Beyond that, the ancient texts, including the Bible and the apocryphal texts, have some rather difficult material to summarily dismiss.

I should've asked about this before. You mean, materials that cannot be explained in terms of a terrestrial elite propaganda model, but absolutely require ET's? Or, would an active anthropomorphic God such as Michael Wagner wishes for, also fill the bill? WTF are you talking about?

 

[Richard Stanley]

I should've asked about this before. You mean, materials that cannot be explained in terms of a terrestrial elite propaganda model, but absolutely require ET's? Or, would an active anthropomorphic God such as Michael Wagner wishes for, also fill the bill? WTF are you talking about?

The Vedas discuss flying craft, as well as the OT does. Plato discusses advanced civilizations long in the past. The Egyptian temple walls depict objects that look like submarines, helicopters, airplanes, etc.. Then there are massive 1,000+ ton megalithic stones, etc., etc..

If modern humans have been around several hundred thousand years, then maybe aliens aren't required, just lost civilizations. Some sunken under the oceans that were 400 feet lower during the last ice age.

 

[Jerry Russell]

The Vedas discuss flying craft, as well as the OT does. Plato discusses advanced civilizations long in the past. The Egyptian temple walls depict objects that look like submarines, helicopters, airplanes, etc..

If the Vedic or OT civilizations had actually developed these technologies, there would be far more records of it than just imaginative descriptions and cartoons. There should also be extensive documentation of the technological developments and scientific theories behind the inventions. Or if alien civilizations were responsible, again there should be better evidence than what little bit we're offered.

Then there are massive 1,000+ ton megalithic stones, etc.,

This was very primitive building technology. Later civilizations learned to accomplish the same functionality using far less material and labor. But there's nothing mysterious about the ability to lift such heavy objects. It was done with levers and such.

 

[Richard Stanley]

This was very primitive building technology.

WTF?

But there's nothing mysterious about the ability to lift such heavy objects. It was done with levers and such.

Show me. If you are talking about 2.5 ton blocks, then I'll believe you, but I'm talking about blocks much bigger. And they weren't removed from bedrock by pounding with small rocks or coconuts either.

There is no technology available today that can do this. Supposedly there are relatively recent pneumatic beds that can move such weights, but only over relatively level and prepared terrain.

Or if alien civilizations were responsible, again there should be better evidence than what little bit we're offered.

I've already offered that 'modern' humans, supposedly (by Science's present claims) around for multiple hundreds of thousand years seem to have had the intellectual capability to develop such things on their own, several times over. So why bring up 'aliens' again?

 

[Jerry Russell]

What I mean by 'primitive' is that it didn't require a lot of materials science, metallurgical skill or structural engineering. Conceptually, it's very simple to make something like a pyramid or temple platform or wall by making a pile of massive rocks.

But, I imagine that there must have been some sort of ancient technological 'arms race' involving the art of cutting and moving gigantic stones. It probably started off relatively small, with practical blocks of a ton or so. But then women started choosing their mates based on the size of the stones they could move, and the rest was history.

A 1500-ton block was moved in 1768 as a base for the Equestrian Statue of Peter the Great in St. Petersburg. The builders used bronze spheres rolling on a track. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze_Horseman#Thunder_Stone