The 'battle' of...1200?

Let's find out about who and what's out there, and how they do what they do.

Moderator: daniel

User avatar
deepfsh
Mage
Mage
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:30 am

Re: The 'battle' of...1200?

Post by deepfsh » Sat Aug 02, 2014 5:16 pm

I haven't read this book yet, but it seems interesting.

Image
CONTENTS

3. THE SHINING ONES
- Elves and Annunaki
- Dragons and Merlins
- Fate of the Fairies
- The Lost Bride

4. THE RING CIRCLE
- [...]
- Sirens and Water Nymphs

6. WARLORDS OF THE PICT-SIDHE
- The Kings of Edom
- Fairy Writing
- Tombs of the Ring Lords
- Kingdom of the Pixies

7. [...]
- [...]
- The Mermaid and the Rings

9. [...]
- [...]
- The Elf King
- Fairy Magic and a Garter

14. THE FAERIE QUEEN
- Red Cross Knight
- Secret Agents
- The Magic Circle
- Mary Stuart
When I asked Bruce about the link between Yoda (according to J. Maxwell a creature worshiped by the Templars) and the Jedi Knights (= Knights Templar / of Malta?), he recommended me the following publications: Finding Merlin: The Truth Behind the Legend (also from same author: Finding Arthur) and Merlin, Missionary-Mage of the Fair Folk.
"You talk the talk ... do you walk the walk?" Kubrick, Full Metal Jacket

neal
Seeker
Seeker
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 4:05 pm

Re: The 'battle' of...1200?

Post by neal » Sat Aug 02, 2014 5:35 pm

That is normal for the ones in those clubs. The highest places are reserved for the ones who sell lies and make up stuff.
That is a requirement. They seek to devour, destroy, and deceive the weak.

That may matter somewhere wherein the original lies are judged separately from those that buy in.

Not my department. Damned is damned, from a distance.

User avatar
daniel
Professor
Professor
Posts: 826
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 6:33 pm
Location: P3X-774
Contact:

Re: The 'battle' of...1200?

Post by daniel » Sun Aug 03, 2014 4:43 pm

maeghan wrote:I'm confused now because from what I've read and talks that I've listened to, Enki was not of that type of appearance. According to Gerald Clark's translations of the Sumerian texts, Enki was the scientist and he was related to Noah ... and was also the one who tipped Noah off. Enlil being the great destroyer.
If you look at other names applied to Enki, such as Oannes, you'll find it translates to something like "the hideous one." Amphibious in appearance, and not much of a "looker," unless you happen to be a gay fish.

Yes, Noah was a descendant of Enki and Enki tipped Noah off about the upcoming Deluge, but the gods screwed around a lot... and you have to remember that they were genetic engineers--when they are talking about procreation, they aren't hopping in the sack with women. Enki was the Chief Engineer of the Annuna (more the engineer than the scientist, but dabbled in both). BTW, Noah, himself, wasn't a little old carpenter--he was a Nefilim-descended giant, that stood about 20 feet tall. Much easier to haul trees around when you're that size.
Power out? Let's see if many hands can make the lights work.
Facebook: daniel.phoenixiii

User avatar
Lozion
Adept
Adept
Posts: 451
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 11:32 am
Location: Changes all the time..

Re: The 'battle' of...1200?

Post by Lozion » Tue Aug 05, 2014 9:10 pm

daniel wrote:
maeghan wrote:I'm confused now because from what I've read and talks that I've listened to, Enki was not of that type of appearance. According to Gerald Clark's translations of the Sumerian texts, Enki was the scientist and he was related to Noah ... and was also the one who tipped Noah off. Enlil being the great destroyer.
If you look at other names applied to Enki, such as Oannes, you'll find it translates to something like "the hideous one." Amphibious in appearance, and not much of a "looker," unless you happen to be a gay fish.

Yes, Noah was a descendant of Enki and Enki tipped Noah off about the upcoming Deluge, but the gods screwed around a lot... and you have to remember that they were genetic engineers--when they are talking about procreation, they aren't hopping in the sack with women. Enki was the Chief Engineer of the Annuna (more the engineer than the scientist, but dabbled in both). BTW, Noah, himself, wasn't a little old carpenter--he was a Nefilim-descended giant, that stood about 20 feet tall. Much easier to haul trees around when you're that size.
So Enoch must've been a Nefilim halfbreed as well hence his flight to sit next the throne of God. Would explain why Western Christianity refuses to consider the Books of Enoch canonical work. They were a bit too revealing no doubt... ;)
In rapport we thrive, in rivalry we strive.

User avatar
maeghan
Mage
Mage
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 8:39 pm

Re: The 'battle' of...1200?

Post by maeghan » Wed Aug 06, 2014 5:59 am

daniel wrote:
maeghan wrote:I'm confused now because from what I've read and talks that I've listened to, Enki was not of that type of appearance. According to Gerald Clark's translations of the Sumerian texts, Enki was the scientist and he was related to Noah ... and was also the one who tipped Noah off. Enlil being the great destroyer.
If you look at other names applied to Enki, such as Oannes, you'll find it translates to something like "the hideous one." Amphibious in appearance, and not much of a "looker," unless you happen to be a gay fish.

Yes, Noah was a descendant of Enki and Enki tipped Noah off about the upcoming Deluge, but the gods screwed around a lot... and you have to remember that they were genetic engineers--when they are talking about procreation, they aren't hopping in the sack with women. Enki was the Chief Engineer of the Annuna (more the engineer than the scientist, but dabbled in both). BTW, Noah, himself, wasn't a little old carpenter--he was a Nefilim-descended giant, that stood about 20 feet tall. Much easier to haul trees around when you're that size.
Well, even so ... we need not take sides. We need to become responsible for ourselves and lead ourselves. Admiral Ackbar would say "It's a Trap!" if he ever sat down with Han Solo and got into a discussion about the dark side and the light side and choosing sides :)

I'm an idealist and it's in my heart and in my soul to see the positive in all things. This has gotten me into trouble countless times throughout my life; not trouble per say, but it's caused me much pain. I'm aware of this happening now so it's easier to recognize when I need to accept that it's not 'good' to engage myself with an entity/person/ideology that I see 'good' in. So, Enki might have tipped off Noah ... but there's usually more to the story; which, in this case, there is.

I wish I had more time to devote to investigating; perhaps I let myself (I know I do this) get caught up in current affairs of the world. I should probably go read some books on the faerie folk, I've always felt a deep connection to faeries (not angels, please no.)

Daniel, Bruce, Aaron ... any good recommendations for books on faerie history/myths? :)
"silence is the consent to slavery" ~ Daniel

User avatar
deepfsh
Mage
Mage
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:30 am

Re: The 'battle' of...1200?

Post by deepfsh » Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:02 am

maeghan wrote:I should probably go read some books on the faerie folk, I've always felt a deep connection to faeries (not angels, please no.)

Daniel, Bruce, Aaron ... any good recommendations for books on faerie history/myths?
DjChrismac can also help you with this (plus audio/video resources). I ordered An Encyclopedia of Fairies: Hobgoblins, Brownies, Bogies, & Other Supernatural Creatures last week - Daniel recommended it a year ago as a good starting point.
"You talk the talk ... do you walk the walk?" Kubrick, Full Metal Jacket

User avatar
deepfsh
Mage
Mage
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:30 am

Re: The 'battle' of...1200?

Post by deepfsh » Wed Aug 06, 2014 4:05 pm

I also just stumbled upon the following: The All-Time 50 Best Bigfoot Books (1961-2014), a blog post written by a researcher Loren Coleman.
"You talk the talk ... do you walk the walk?" Kubrick, Full Metal Jacket

User avatar
Djchrismac
Adept
Adept
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:38 pm
Location: Glasgow
Contact:

Re: The 'battle' of...1200?

Post by Djchrismac » Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:49 pm

daniel wrote:Amphibious in appearance, and not much of a "looker," unless you happen to be a gay fish.
Hahaha i'm glad to see you've been watching more South Park episodes! :lol:
deepfsh wrote:
maeghan wrote:I should probably go read some books on the faerie folk, I've always felt a deep connection to faeries (not angels, please no.)

Daniel, Bruce, Aaron ... any good recommendations for books on faerie history/myths?
DjChrismac can also help you with this (plus audio/video resources). I ordered An Encyclopedia of Fairies: Hobgoblins, Brownies, Bogies, & Other Supernatural Creatures last week - Daniel recommended it a year ago as a good starting point.
Cheers I certainly can, i'll send you a PM Maeghan to see what area you want to start with, so much to choose from... :)

Let me know if that book is worth getting Deepfsh, I like the look of it, the older the better!

User avatar
infinity
Mage
Mage
Posts: 241
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:32 am

Re: The 'battle' of...1200?

Post by infinity » Thu Aug 07, 2014 2:42 am

So Enoch must've been a Nefilim halfbreed as well hence his flight to sit next the throne of God. Would explain why Western Christianity refuses to consider the Books of Enoch canonical work. They were a bit too revealing no doubt... ;)
Yeah Lozion, I totally agree with you - yet you'd be surprised how many of my christian friends (the type who's actually sensitive to all sorts of psychic stuff or have actual abilities themselves) have read the books of Enoch before I even knew it existed.

I have this huge debate with my fellow christians about the bible and what they believe about it. Like, its believed that its "the Word of God" then I go to point out what about the other books (like Enochs') and they say but only the canon is the Word of God then I say "WHICH CANON, because wikipedia alone mentions like, NINE different bible canon". Then they try a different angle 'cause that confuses the crap out of them. Then they talk about how the bible itself defines the scriptures and the Word of God - but different words are used for scriptures (graphe or gramma) than for Word (logos) of God with different meanings (the one is static information, the other the bible actually defines as a person, Christ himself (eg John 1:1), and logos is used when referring to audible stuff, not written stuff like "graphe" does) - nevermind the fact that whenever one of these disciples talked about the scriptures they referred to the old testament alone since that's the only scriptures they had at the time - yet christians interpret it as including the new testament which they didn't have back then.

Bart Ehrman, a historian and expert in a bible school, points out discrepancies between the 4 gospels when you read them side by side. How the one would say they went to place A then did B and went to place C, the other gospel would mix them up and in one case even talk about a different place or person for the same event. How one part of the one gospel (in the earliest scrolls they found) is an exact, word-for-word copy of a part of another one (Mark), which is impossible for word-of-mouth accounts - so there's so much evidence of tampering. And the list goes on. And trust me, he has a LIST.

What annoys me is most is how my fellow christians abdicate their spiritual hunger to some theology instead of using that drive to expand their understanding and growth (here we'd call it raising our consciousness). Like they don't know that "occult" simply means "hidden" and the bible talks about it: Jeremiah 33:3 AMP "3 Call to Me and I will answer you and show you great and mighty things, fenced in and hidden, which you do not know (do not distinguish and recognize, have knowledge of and understand)." Its like, wtf, the bible tells me to actually ask for and learn about these things. Of course u get the dodgy black magic stuff but that isn't 'occult' by definition - heck, any sort of magic and anything to do with LMs are considered 'occult'. Hidden knowledge.

I'm gonna continue my rant about how people misuse/abuse the bible (I come from a christian upbringing so I can say this stuff):

Another stupid belief is that what makes a person righteous is "believing in Jesus" when the bible never says that ever - it always talks about how faith (a real virtue, not some religious thing) which is rapport with "God" (has nothing to do with keeping some stupid "laws" like not working on a sunday, its about trust and sensitivity in the context of a live relationship), is what makes people "righteous" (more on this later in the post). This is important because you had no one witness to the burial of Moses, people like Enoch and Elijah was "taken up" into "heaven" and never saw death, people like Abraham and David was stated as righteous in God's eyes - all this before the "blood of Jesus" stuff. So the concept of "righteousness" is so super skewed even in the most benign of denominations. And I'm talking purely biblical stuff here so christians can't argue with this shit. The book of Hebrews is all about this stuff. You also get some theology-breaking verses like Joel 2:28 that makes it clear that you can't judge anyone as unworthy or "bad" if they don't believe the same you do because then this can't be true: "It will come about after this That I will pour out My Spirit on all mankind; And your sons and daughters will prophesy, Your old men will dream dreams, Your young men will see visions" - all mankind includes non-christians. So much for that belief lol.

Now on to what the bible actually says about "righteousness" - which scares the crap out of any christian because no teaches this stuff in any church. Let's check out the definition of sin: Romans 14:14 "I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean. " The reason people give away their own sovereignty as beings (which are already "righteous" without having to believe or do anything, u simply have to exist) to some man-made theological concept of needing a middle-man religious idol like Jesus (who was a teacher to set people free with higher understanding, not some blood sacrifice to appease some blood god), is because people actually believe the lie that they are "unrighteous" and will go to hell - based on some conscience issue - CAUSED by church people guilting each other - NOT CAUSED by breaking some religious rule.

The resolution to the conscience issue is knowledge - not some rules about right and wrong: Romans 14: "22 So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who does not condemn himself by what he approves." So basically "truth" i.e. knowledge sets us free - if we don't feel bad for doing something (like breaking some religious rule like not working on a sunday) because we understand it (its about a balanced life that includes rest), then we don't have to go on some guilt trip and need no "righteousness" earned by some religious belief of doing something like saying some prayers.

My fellow christians, without skipping a beat, will then say that I'm saying the bible gives us a ticket to do whatever evil we want then as long as we don't think its evil or bad. Funny they should say that, because if you give a child a rule, "don't do X", and later you can trust them enough with it "ok I trust you with X you're old enough now" - they don't go ballistic and cause havoc. But if they're not ready and you tell them things like "rules are meant to be broken" then guess what? They go ballistic and cause havoc. It was never about right or wrong its about cultivating maturity and creating boundaries that are safe for the child to learn in. THE POINT is to remove the "don't do X" rule. But what happens when you are mature enough to not need the rule because you understand it fully and can be responsible with it? 1 Cor 13:11 "When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind." So you get to the point of "ok I trust you with X you're old enough now".

So now you can use a blade on a scalpel as a surgeon to save lives as opposed to using a blade to kill someone that pissed you off. It was never wrong to use blades - its about learning and understanding blades so you can use them with maturity.

There you go people. If any christian gives you shit, tell them to come here and PM me and show them that post. I will use pure biblical references for everything I say to them and show multiple reinforcements of it from the bible so no one can say i took something out of context.

User avatar
deepfsh
Mage
Mage
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:30 am

Re: The 'battle' of...1200?

Post by deepfsh » Thu Aug 07, 2014 3:18 am

Djchrismac wrote:Let me know if that book is worth getting Deepfsh,

End of August, beginning of September ... but better later than never!
Djchrismac wrote:I like the look of it, the older the better!
I agree, even the users' comments on Amazon are all very positive. I just thought I could make a pdf version of it, since you can't get it in any digital form.
Djchrismac wrote:i'm glad to see you've been watching more South Park episodes
Are they still being made :?: Or you meant the old ones?
"You talk the talk ... do you walk the walk?" Kubrick, Full Metal Jacket

Post Reply