I could use some help from someone knowledgeable in Geology please.

[Jim_Duyer]

Yesterday I happened to translate a short message in cuneiform,
in the Sumerian style, from about 2005 B.C. That dating is fairly
certain, and it was during the UR III period of Sumerian history.
It has not been translated previously, nor transliterated.
The overall theme concerns the Earth, and it relates to its creation.

The line that caught my attention was this one:

da ki du gar be

Which I have translated as:

It was stirred into a liquid and then it idled, it rested.
The the Earth, the land, pushed and thrust to multiply,
and it became covered or coated with a crust.
The land was then diminished and withdrew (was reduced).
The land became scattered into geometric shapes - like bows.

I happened to think of Pangaea, and the event where (according to
theory) one supercontinent (about 335 million years ago) was later
reduced into the continents that we recognize today.

That is, at one time North and South America, Europe and Africa,
were joined together, in one lump from north to south. Then c. 100
million years later they separated, roughly into the shapes that
we recognize today.

Could you tell me if the above description of a creation event seems accurate,
and to what degree?

I will publish this shortly but I am entirely lacking in the arts of
Geology. And other fields as well. Thanks for any help you
can give.

[Ewan]

Yesterday I happened to translate a short message in cuneiform,
in the Sumerian style, from about 2005 B.C. That dating is fairly
certain, and it was during the UR III period of Sumerian history.
It has not been translated previously, nor transliterated.
The overall theme concerns the Earth, and it relates to its creation.

The line that caught my attention was this one:

da ki du gar be

Which I have translated as:

It was stirred into a liquid and then it idled, it rested.
The(n?) the Earth, the land, pushed and thrust to multiply,
and it became covered or coated with a crust.
The land was then diminished and withdrew (was reduced).
The land became scattered into geometric shapes - like bows.

I happened to think of Pangaea, and the event where (according to theory) one supercontinent (about 335 million years ago) was later
reduced into the continents that we recognize today.

That is, at one time North and South America, Europe and Africa, were joined together, in one lump from north to south. Then c. 100
million years later they separated, roughly into the shapes that we recognize today.

Could you tell me if the above description of a creation event seems accurate, and to what degree?

I will publish this shortly but I am entirely lacking in the arts of
Geology. And other fields as well. Thanks for any help you
can give.

Hi Jim,

I need a little clarification please.

It would be excellent if we could work out what It was?

The Sumerian 'line' that caught your attention is mono-syllabic - how can that translate to 5 sentences with many concepts involved?

Your understanding of the Pangea expansion fits current thinking, hopefully Gwin Ru will arrive to cast further light..

[Jim_Duyer]

Thanks for your comment. You are correct. I have a bad habit of going from A to D without pausing very long at B or C. Sometimes when I get excited I forget to be a courteous human. Sorry.

IT is the Earth.
His writing began with a discussion of the Earth, the beginning of time, and the creation event.
I didn't include those lines (or some three hundred or so more) due to time and space constraints (mine not the authors).


For several years I have been working on a template. It allows one to translate easily from one ancient language to another, without error.

The author of this line was an adept - perhaps the first Cryptographer in history so far. His writing could be read right to left or left to right, depending upon the context that he framed it in. And on a great many occasions, other lines of his provide three meanings in the same words. Three related meanings both thematically and grammatically.

He was a Hittite, living in Syria, but wrote in cuneiform, with Sumerian as his underlying language. I believe that it is very likely that he had a Hatti ancestry, since they were taken over by the Hittites. He was a member of the Amorites tribes, although of the bene Yamina tribes and not the Sim'alites, so he was a good guy, so to speak.

He claims, in other lines, that his information came from a Pillar in stone that was pre-flood. And then, of course, he proceeds to explain where he buried it, right down to within 25 meters of a modern location. So that might make for a good expedition for someone. I have translated the Gobekli Tepe writings and the Jerf al-Ahmar tablets, and both are from 9000 BC and both are in a pictographic or pre-cuneiform version of Sumerian, so his idea is probably correct. Unless you listen to traditional archaeologists that is.

So, I rushed to get this question out, since it seems to resemble the description of someone observing this from off the Earth - from space, and perhaps out of time, as in observed in multiple visits and then recounted to the author, who was a brilliant person but not skilled in the sciences beyond his time period of 2000 BC.

This is a factual example and not science fiction, just to let you know. So, here are the definitions for those words, and you can see how I came up with those lines:


da Old Babylonian wr. da9 "to stir into a liquid"
da Old Akkadian, Ur III wr. da "to idle"

ki ED IIIa, Ur III, Old Babylonian wr. ki "place; ground, earth, land; toward; underworld; land, country; lower, down below"

du ED IIIb, Ur III, Old Babylonian wr. du7 "to push, thrust, gore; "
du ED IIIb, Ur III, Old Babylonian wr. du3 "to plant; to fix upright, erect; to drive in, fix; "

gar, Early Dynastic I-II, Ur III, Old Babylonian wr. gar3; kar2; "to put, place, lay down; to place on, put on; to encrust, mount with; to give in place of something, replace; to plate; to supply; to remove; to put aside, discard; to settle, fall" to encrust

be ED IIIb, Ur III, Old Babylonian wr. be4; be6 "to deduct, remove; to diminish, reduce; to withdraw, receive (as an allotment)"
One for be that I left out is that of a geometrical figure similar to a bow - sorry that line did not copy paste, but any Sumerian dictionary will confirm it.

EDIT
Duh. I left out the second bit of the line. Here it is
bir ge
bir Ur III, Old Babylonian wr. bir; bir9 "to scatter, disperse"
bir Old Babylonian wr. bir7; bir6; bir9 "to shred"
ge wr. ge16 "a geometric shape; an architectural term" Akk. qaštu "bow".




I also wonder how in the world he knew about that sequence of events - in other words, who told him?
He claims it was EL (God).

If you have a chance to watch the film about the absent-minded professor, that's me.

[shaberon]

Interesting...what are you doing with unworked Sumerian? Where is this from?


As a legend, it is not unusual...India's Varaha or Boar Face incarnation of Vishnu is about the globe changing from watery to having the uplifted crust. But then I would think their geography is more symbolic than literal.

I also happen to question tectonic plate drift--in other words, rather than moving sideways, it may be that the "plates" are more like pegs that move up and down. Sort of like pistons in an engine.

So, on the one hand, I would lean towards, yes, there was an epoch of hardening-off of the land, but, I am not sure that its subsequent sideways motion is convincing.

[Jim_Duyer]

Thanks for your comment. Actually, if you go to the UCLA site, or Oxford, they have a library of Cuneiform tablets from various periods, and over half of them have never been translated. That's just the ones they put up = out of a million or so tablets that are in various places around the world, less than 10% have been translated to date. I do transliteration as well - I take tablets and read their symbols into Sumerian, and then translate them. I've tried to publish some of my results to UCLA but they want me to submit it in a PDF and I'm not skilled at publishing in that venue.

I agree that there is some question on which way things moved. I am very much aware that expressing my opinions on geological matters will result in some very heated replies very quickly - so that's why I politely ask rather than suggest. That and the fact that I have no training in that field, ha ha.

I believe that the Hindu have a deep knowledge about a great many things, and that we don't know most of what they wrote. One problem is that with their writings there are multiple definitions for each term - pretty much like Sumerian now that I think about it. But my understanding, based on the comments of several writers from India is that their religious books are difficult to understand even for them. They probably know what my author did, and at the same or earlier date. It's just the first I saw it in writing in that form.

An alternative definition is "to mount", which would give that up and down motion you mention. So thanks, I will not hesitate to offer that as an alternative suggestion toward the meaning.

If I had the brains that the writer had it would be easier perhaps. Three meanings in a palindrome format, hidden inside of another text written in a completely different language - boggles my mind.

[onawah]

Jim, I think you might find some of the information on this thread to be of interest:https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?120618-Starforts-and-Other-Ancient-Anomalies
In particular the posts including input from Dutchsinse, who has been making a study of continents and the way they are shaped, which might tie into some of the research you are doing.
From what he is gathering, they are often shaped geometrically (and quite precisely in their measurements), and how that came about is a mystery, but perhaps the Sumerians had some insights.
Most of that thread is about Starforts, but Dutch is probably going to make more appearances on the CryptoAlchemist channel and may also post more about his continental findings there, and post about that more also on his regular youtube channel.
He is also on Twitch, of which I am not a member, but that may be a better place to learn more from him, since youtube is beginning to censor more now.

[Eagle Eye]

Interesting.
Can you post the translation of the Gobekli Tepe writings, or at least the most important part.

[Jim_Duyer]

Sure. The H and O design on one pillar (can't recall the artifact number for reference, but it is featured in many images) translates one direction as Water is Life, and in the other as Children are Life, or something very close to that. I have perhaps a half dozen done, but not in front of me.

The Tărtăria tablets, on the other hand, are very sad. They speak of one group that put up fences, caused their neighbors to get angry and attack them, and this forced a move to another area. It's much longer and more complicated but that's the gist of it.


Oh, I wanted to share this for quite some time - since I saw a comment a week ago that mentioned
the WOW Signal from the observatory in Ohio. One of the nicer ladies on here was commenting on it.

I have translated that one, as well as the LDE, long delayed echo signals, and
the Wow says "Da Fe". Not all messages are in English. Da means grant or give, but in English translations it can also mean 'to have'. And Fe is of course faith. Have Faith. Don't give up - quite an interesting message.

I was going to write that up as well but I am restricted because if I put it up here I can not include
it in a book, and I have several that I hope to publish. So for now I will have to leave it at that.

[Jim_Duyer]

I got goose bumps when I read CryptoAlchemist and I thought, why am I not on that? Thanks for your comment - I will check out the link asap.

I particularly liked the part of the message I translated above that spoke of "bow shaped". I've always looked at the continents and their resemblance to pulled bows, ready for firing.

[Jim_Duyer]

BTW - I promise to try my best not to be so scatter-brained, to look over my posts before hitting the button to publish.

I like to work on three or four language translations at the same time - sometimes in different languages - it helps my mind to focus. Don't know why - always been that way. And sometimes I forget to pull out of that gear and get back in the gear to publish content that has some order of completeness to it. Thanks.

[Eagle Eye]

About the Gobekli Tepe translations I mean any clue about who were those people, what is that site, who built it and for what purpose?
I don't think that Sumerian are the first civilization, there were others before them. The place of the stories of the fallen angels (mentioned as gods) are mainly in Mediterranean, but also India has it's own version of those.

[Jim_Duyer]

I agree with you - I think the Sumerians promoted their writing system but I have some indications that it originated in the Caucasus region. The Sumerians have their origins in Anatolia, and of that I am quite sure. Just to the east, and slightly north of the bend of the Halys river - the home of the Hatti-Hittites.

No clue about the people yet. I have another that I translated and it says "Flood!". Which doesn't surprise me, but the biggest flood was the overflow of the Black Sea, circa 7300 BC, that we know of, and that's probably the operative phrase - that we know of.
I believe that it was covered over because they knew that a flood was coming, a big one. They were astronomers, after all, and very good at their trade.

I don't as some do, think that it was a religious center nor a town. It was probably a sacred site used for studying the stars and perhaps learning mathematics.
It's difficult for me to get my teeth into it very deep because they are not sharing much information so far.

And after so many years they still are only a small fraction done in their excavations. That may be on purpose, however.

The Sumerians I date to about 8000 BC because the earliest tablets that I have worked on use the production of wheat as a dating point. The Amorites who were the ancestors to many of the biblical patriarchs are of about
the same period. And no, there rare others with writing much, much older than anything in that part of the world.

When I wrote the above it seemed as if I must be someone who knows all the languages of the world. I don't. But I sold my businesses and was able to retire at age 44. I have spent 27 years doing pure research on my own. And that's a lot of hours. I've managed to put a good bit of the pieces together, but I doubt if we will ever know the whole. I hope to go out with a tablet on my screen and my fingers on the keyboard - in about 30 years.

[Inversion]

If you want to give credibility to a channeled work like The Urantia Book (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Urantia_Book) then the below may help.

paper 57 (https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/paper-57-origin-urantia)



8. Crustal Stabilization
The Age of Earthquakes
The World Ocean and the First Continent

57:8.1 (660.3) 1,000,000,000 years ago is the date of the actual beginning of Urantia history. The planet had attained approximately its present size. And about this time it was placed upon the physical registries of Nebadon and given its name, Urantia.

57:8.2 (660.4) The atmosphere, together with incessant moisture precipitation, facilitated the cooling of the earth’s crust. Volcanic action early equalized internal-heat pressure and crustal contraction; and as volcanoes rapidly decreased, earthquakes made their appearance as this epoch of crustal cooling and adjustment progressed.

57:8.3 (660.5) The real geologic history of Urantia begins with the cooling of the earth’s crust sufficiently to cause the formation of the first ocean. Water-vapor condensation on the cooling surface of the earth, once begun, continued until it was virtually complete. By the end of this period the ocean was world-wide, covering the entire planet to an average depth of over one mile. The tides were then in play much as they are now observed, but this primitive ocean was not salty; it was practically a fresh-water covering for the world. In those days, most of the chlorine was combined with various metals, but there was enough, in union with hydrogen, to render this water faintly acid.

57:8.4 (660.6) At the opening of this faraway era, Urantia should be envisaged as a water-bound planet. Later on, deeper and hence denser lava flows came out upon the bottom of the present Pacific Ocean, and this part of the water-covered surface became considerably depressed. The first continental land mass emerged from the world ocean in compensatory adjustment of the equilibrium of the gradually thickening earth’s crust.

57:8.5 (660.7) 950,000,000 years ago Urantia presents the picture of one great continent of land and one large body of water, the Pacific Ocean. Volcanoes are still widespread and earthquakes are both frequent and severe. Meteors continue to bombard the earth, but they are diminishing in both frequency and size. The atmosphere is clearing up, but the amount of carbon dioxide continues large. The earth’s crust is gradually stabilizing.
Continues in the link

[shaberon]

The Sumerians I date to about 8000 BC because the earliest tablets that I have worked on use the production of wheat as a dating point. The Amorites who were the ancestors to many of the biblical patriarchs are of about
the same period. And no, there rare others with writing much, much older than anything in that part of the world.



Okay. From around this period I have looked at a few things in a mixture of agriculture, genetics, geology, and so forth, and so the following may make sense here.

First I am skeptical about translating pictograms such as Gobekli Tepe. There are also mild pauses about related subjects such as comet impacts or the Black Sea deluge might not have been so gigantic.

But there is something to it which is curious. And yes, it is the cultivation of wheat, which moved eastward for a few thousand years and more or less stopped when it reached India. With the spread of what, there was some human mixing, leading to the type called Iranian Farmer, which means mixed with Anatolian. And that human mix does not really affect India either.

However everything was connected.

In geology it turns out to be the case that the ancient world had one source of Lapis Lazuli, which is in today's Afghanistan.

Such an artifact has been found in one of the earliest Anatolian sites from 5,000+ B. C. E.

Moreover, what would usually be called the beginning of writing in Egypt and Mesopotamia, depends on lapis for its earliest myths.

They were less independently arising and inventing anything, than rising to prominence in a vast traders' network wherein the Egyptians paid a higher price on lapis than probably anything.

Simultaneously, the Indus Valley Culture existed and was also full of lapis.

It did not accept wheat because it was a rice-based culture from around Kasi or Varanasi, which domesticated a strand of Japonica, that is, a rice the Japanese had gotten from China. India perhaps mixed it with her own wild varieties and had a low opinion of wheat.

They do not have the Anatolian mixture or the so-called "Aryan" mixture from Central Asia because it turns out that the central Asian horse may have been less influential than imagined. Indian writings mention thirty-four ribs, which is a much more likely match for an Arabian horse, which has been found to have been developed at a correspondingly early time ca. 2,000 B. C. E.


In terms of tablets and seals, India may have done this as a response. Its material has been found in Mesopotamia and even at Elam at a range prior to 2,000 B. C. E., and the Mesopotamians clearly talk about needing translators to deal with them. The actual Indic writings are not considered translated by anyone.

"Meluhha" I believe is Akkadian for talking to Indians.

I am not easily convinced about certain points, but, yes, there are a lot of recent findings that really have re-shaped the intellectual history we grew up with. There was some kind of widespread, somewhat connected form of civilization as far back as about 8,000 B. C. E.

[Jim_Duyer]

Thanks for your comment. I agree with the connected civilizations going back that far or further. I did find that there was an additional source for Lapis Lazuli in ancient Anatolia - our archaeologists have not updated their records.
Sorry for your speculation about translating Gobekli Tepe - I have a lot more from Jerf al Ahmar, dated at almost the same date, and they translate very clearly.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Thanks for your contribution.

[Pris]

.
.
Maybe I can help out here at least with the continents part. Not Pangea. Instead, the growing Earth.


Neal Adams - Science: 01 - Conspiracy: Earth is Growing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ

[Bill Ryan]

Maybe I can help out here at least with the continents part. Not Pangea. Instead, the growing Earth.

Neal Adams - Science: 01 - Conspiracy: Earth is Growing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQYes; this isn't just a joke, and for various reasons I do think this is credible. I can't possibly understand how the mechanism might work, but there's a lot of discussion on this interesting and serious thread:


Is the Earth expanding? (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?97720-Is-the-Earth-expanding&highlight=neal+adams)

:focus:

[Jim_Duyer]

Excellent contribution - thank you. I will also take this into consideration.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Thanks to everyone for opening my eyes. I will examine all of these as having merit.

[ This is a somewhat longish comment that you will want to read, I believe .]


Today is Sunday, so it's fitting that I fill you in on the rest of the story, as they say.
I did not mean to be deceptive, but I wanted to ask an honest question about
the creation event without the notion of religious beliefs or lack thereof,
creeping into the answers. If you have a chance to read my books or reports
you will understand how I love keep something back for the end. It's the type
of books that I like to read myself, and I frankly stole the idea.

When I mentioned in the original post that I was using my template to translate from
one language into Sumerian, I omitted to mention that it was from ancient Hebrew into Sumerian.
It was a slight omission, and done only so that I would not prejudice the answers to
my question due to it having a clear Biblical significance.

The line in Sumerian is accurate. I obtained it by using the template that I developed over
a period of six years, that translates freely from the original Hebrew, without vowels, into
pure Sumerian, easily and with 100% accuracy. I will include the template and instructions
on how to easily use it when I publish.

The line in Sumerian came from two words in ancient Hebrew. And that's why I know that
the IT that they were speaking of was the creation of our world, since the two words are:

1) Bre'shiyth. Beyt, defined as 'in, on', and re'shiyth meaning 'the beginning'.

2) Bara, defined as 'created, made, produced', etc.

And yes, these are the first two words in the Old Testament, Genesis 1:1, where
it begins "In the Beginning created the Elohim" etc.
In fact, here is that line in Hebrew:
B'rëshiyt Bärä élohiym ët ha SHämayim w'ët hääretz.

I merely used my template to convert B'reshiyt Bara to the line that I provided in Sumerian.

The rest is factual. The author that I am translating here is Job, author of the book of the same
name. He was an actual person who lived in the time of Abraham, who was also a living
person, and whom my other posts I date to 2000 BC in Ur of Sumer as a scribe there.
Every detail I mentioned about the author, and the fact that he recorded his work on
stone and in tablets, is correct. The place where he hid the knowledge that had been
preserved on pillars is also correct. That we could go dig up the knowledge given by
El, the creator God, in the Garden of Eden and before the flood is also correct, if we allow
for the tensions of ISIS, ISIL, and other maniacs, but at this time it is fairly calm there
in the bend of the Euphrates in northern Syria.

I just wanted to keep the Genesis part out until I received some answers to my post.

Some people assume the Bible contains no factual history, and certainly no science. They
base that assumption, perhaps, on the text as it is given for the common folk to read - the
adepts read deeper and derive the meanings hidden there for those with eyes that can see.

I don't, and this is clear from my previous posts over the years, have a great deal of respect
for the Old Testament as it is translated for us in English. I do, however, have the utmost
respect for the Bible hidden inside of the Bible. Job and his group hid the truth inside
of the Hebrew text, and probably also helped the Hebrews when their alphabet was being
adopted and adapted, prior to the Bible becoming written down. And it's still there.

The EL, or God the Creator, of Job's people was kind, similar to Jesus Christ.
He taught his children writing, astronomy, and many other fields.
He not only did not punish them for some Tree of Knowledge violation, he
gave them his knowledge and encouraged them to record it on stone tablets.
Job tells us that he taught them how to read and write as well.

In short, the version that we have been fed since childhood of an angry, vengeful
and jealous God who sent his people out to slaughter men, women and children
and take their land is not the God that Adam, Seth, Enosh, Noah, Abraham and Job knew.

We find mention of this switch in Exodus, when Yahweh says ‘I was not known by Abraham, etc. as Yahweh, but as El Shaddai was I known.’ El Shaddai is simply EL or the Creator God of the Shaddai, which is the region of twin mounds of earth near the bend in the Euphrates (Syria) where Job lived. Shad in Hebrew is breasts or breast shaped mounds. He was EL and also called El of the Shadday.

I've translated most of Job, a lot of Genesis, and 600 or so interesting terms from
other books, and especially in Daniel.

Reading this hidden version you may, as I have done, come to respect a book that
many have cast aside as old, outdated, non-scientific, etc. It provides the measure
of the circumference of the Earth, accurate to 96.4% and the circumference of the
Moon, accurate to slightly better than that. It tells us the true story of a flood
that was only regional in nature, that they were warned about by a student of
Enosh the astronomer (not Enock, this Enosh is the grandson of Adam), and they
built small crates out of reeds to keep their food, sheep and children safe while
they rode it out downstream. Some died, but of the thousands there only a small
percentage.

Cain's group could not have their stained name fit into the position that they wanted
to occupy in society. So they wrote a story that made it possible for only the "righteous few"
to survive a world flood, and thus, by magic, they are now part of the ancestry of those
righteous few. But it simply isn’t true.

Ask yourselves - if in fact the traditional version of the flood that we see in today's
bibles were true, then why do we have so many evil people still among us? And they seem to hold the highest positions of power. Make no mistake about it, Cain's sons are very much
in evidence.

Cain slew Abel, and the reason for this is not what you have read. But it did split
the tribes and cause an everlasting hatred of the Cain group for the Seth group.
God was forced to expel both groups, but he led them out, by the hand, to new
lands outside Eden. All of this is given in greater detail, but space here doesn't
permit it.

So no, there was no original sin, and that's not the reason for sin and evil; the truth
is there are just a lot of nasty people in the world. But not all of us, and they don't have
to remain that way. But from the version that we have been "sold", it is clear that
the bad guys won, they rule the narrative, and they are calling the shots for now.

I plan to publish this as soon as I can get it laid out in paperback form. My last book
was stolen almost as soon as I published it, and so it is taking me a month or so longer
to do this in print form. But the work is done, and the page setup is commencing.

I would like others to build on my work; to use my template and continue with other
revelations from the traditional text. I have six other topics, some of which I consider
to be equally astounding and of equal value to complete, and not sufficient time to
re-translate the entire Old Testament. Good luck and God bless to those that
wish to do this - I will make it extremely easy for anyone to do at home, whether
or not they are learned in Sumerian, proto-Hebrew or any other language.


Happy Sunday.

[Gwin Ru]

...

... hold my beer...


Just a small detail: that bible stuff was translated from Sumerian into Greek then into Hebrew:

Here: The So-called "Word Of God" (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?86384-Here-The-So-called-Word-Of-God&p=1120106&viewfull=1#post1120106)

[Jim_Duyer]

...

... hold my beer...


Just a small detail: that bible stuff was translated from Sumerian into Greek then into Hebrew:

Here: The So-called "Word Of God" (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?86384-Here-The-So-called-Word-Of-God&p=1120106&viewfull=1#post1120106)




Hello. It was hinted that you might be the one to answer the original question, so I was hoping to have your input on it.

Actually, scholars believe that the biblical version of Job was written partly in Aramaic and partly in the most ancient form of Hebrew - based on the words he used and the grammar, they were able to state that Job was actually written prior to Genesis, and that it used terms from about the 2000 year BC era.

Based on the translation that I have done, he mentions historical events
that have been pegged by traditional scholars at that age as well, such as the first time that Amurru was introduced to the Tuttul area from recently conquered Sumeria.

Some modern Biblical translations are from the Septuagint, written in Koine Greek, at the time of the Ptolemy Solter crowd. The Hebrew scholars used their own ancient records to publish it in Greek for posterity - they spoke Greek at the time and were doing this at the request of the Greek pharaoh. However, they sent to Canaan for the Rabbin scholars, and if not totally in Hebrew then it would have had its roots in that language.

Just as Job wrote in cuneiform, using Sumerian as the underlying language, but he could have written with Hittite as the underlying, I would imagine. He didn't because Hittite did not exist when some of the events he records happened. With Hatti and not Hittite ancestry, it is possible that he could have known Hatti as well - and they were indeed a people prior to those events (prior to 8000 BC, but in the Caucasus area at that time).


I followed your link but immediately I noted that Plato was the one who suggested this.
Plato was born some fifteen hundred years after Abraham or Job, so he would not have known this - and really the biblical texts themselves were not put down until about six hundred years before Plato - form oral history but also from stone engravings and tablets - as Job tells us much earlier.

If Plato knew anything at all about the hidden writings of Job he would have published the circumferences in Greek and then claimed to be the author, as many Greek scholars of his time did - such as Pythagoras whose algebra comes straight from Babylonian works of centuries earlier and without crediting them.

I'm not trying to publish a new bible. I could care less. I simply wish to point out that there were scientists prior to 4000 years ago, and they felt the need to hide their findings because the religious around them were destroying everything that did not fit their viewpoints.

I stated, and do believe, that Job's (and actually it was not mostly him but those that followed him as well) version is clear, and more likely to be true than the one we were sold.

As to your link, I can agree that there is no worse translation on the face of the planet than the King James Version. Although, in all fairness, if you place the translations next to each other on a page, nearly none agree with the KJV.

We seem to both agree on how bad the traditional version of the bible story is. I am only carrying that forward and offering the original version before it was modified by the powers that be. The bible is a tool for control, as it is now published. If we see what was originally meant, in the version from
Job, we see what it could have, and perhaps should have been. It would have saved a lot of lives and suffering over the millennium.

Whether or not you believe in the Bible, you might find an interest in learning the version that was hidden, in order to preserve it, and the reasons that it was done. And as well, the actions that were performed by some to control us today - because what the Cainite group did to the bible is being carried on by our governments and our scholars to some extent even today.

Please let me know what you think about the original question regarding whether or not it describes a continental drift theory that might have some truth.

Thanks.

EDIT I had a chance to read your link more thoroughly.
It's like bizzarro-world. One scholar found the crib notes from the
King James scholars. OK And from there he finds that each scholar
was given a section to translate. OK - because that's how it works
with large manuscripts - one person is better in Hebrew, another in
Aramaic, another in Greek, etc. and each does his part.
To go from A, that there were multiple translators from the group
of many originals that they had, to These dudes wrote the bible is
a joke. They translated into English, they did not write anything.
Yes, they influenced the translation, but so did King James - he had
them change words that spoke against Kings and their power.
Did that change our perception of the Bible, surely.
Did that change the original text and message - no, not at all.

Are there tens of thousands of errors in the English versions we have.
Absolutely.
I can tell you about 11,851 of them right now. That's the number of times
that ALL of our translated versions, from KJV to English Standard to Roman,
all of them, exclude the word eth in Hebrew from translation. Just omit it,
act like its noting and ignore it.
Why? Because eth means mark, sign, symbol and is written with aleph tav,
or the first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Eth means "as it was written"
But they would die before they would tell you that, because that begs
the question - where are these writings? Where is the original that it
was written from.
I was providing the geographical location to those very originals in my
post - beneath the rear of the floor of the former first temple in Emar, Syria.

Then we would have the bible "as it is written" and not the psychological ops
nonsense that we have today. Or you can translate Job as I have done.

[onawah]

Countless more souls than were on Earth originally have taken bodies and incarnated on Earth, since those days described in the Old Testament (whether accurately described or not).
Whatever genetic ancestry those newly arrived inherited in that process, does not necessarily determine whether the motivation and the resulting actions of those souls were pure or evil.
They may well have arrived here with a lot of karma from former lifetimes, that had little to do with those souls already inhabiting the planet.

Cain's group could not have their stained name fit into the position that they wanted
to occupy in society. So they wrote a story that made it possible for only the "righteous few"
to survive a world flood, and thus, by magic, they are now part of the ancestry of those
righteous few. But it simply isn’t true.

Ask yourselves - if in fact the traditional version of the flood that we see in today's
bibles were true, then why do we have so many evil people still among us? And they seem to hold the highest positions of power. Make no mistake about it, Cain's sons are very much
in evidence.

[Pris]

.

Some people assume the Bible contains no factual history, and certainly no science. They
base that assumption, perhaps, on the text as it is given for the common folk to read - the
adepts read deeper and derive the meanings hidden there for those with eyes that can see.


Another way to interpret the Bible... Bill Donahue really helped to change the way I see everything. Years ago, I enjoyed listening to countless hours... so much information/knowledge. (I really need to revisit his lectures.) A lot of it is entirely agreeable to me whereas other topics/takes, not so much. But, overall, in my opinion, Bill Donahue's lectures are absolutely outstanding.

When it comes to where I've gained so much of my spiritual knowledge and putting the pieces together, my hat's off to Bill Donahue.


Link to his popular videos, overview:
https://www.youtube.com/@bdona4556/videos


Bill Donahue's web site:
https://www.hiddenmeanings.com/

[shaberon]

I am a fan of comprehensive, multi-subject analyses with sometimes the important question held in reserve.


I will, however, say that criticism of the very first line of Genesis has been going on for a long time, perhaps hundreds of years, and that King James might be one of the last people on earth we would want to remember at all.


Correct that both Old and New Testaments are hatchet jobs that confuse and lose the possible original meaning, and replace it with something quite sinister.


In the same way it would be anachronistic and impossible for "god" to be in the Bible, then, in an actual timeline, "primitive" Judaism likely consisted of a few Prophets and Psalms, and there was no such thing as Genesis or a Messiah until the Babylonian Captivity. There probably is no Hebrew prior to 1,000 B. C. E., and "Semitic" is really Phoenician.

So, the Book of Genesis is most likely a copy or rendition of a prior legend.


From Masoretic Hebrew, the first sentence was translated from:

B’râsh ithbara Elôhîm eth hashamayim v’eth h’arets


but just like inserting vowels, spaces or word breaks are also "interpretations", and so this is an equal transliteration:



B’râsith bara Elôhîm eth hashamayim v’eth h’arets


This arrangement dispenses with any notion of a "beginning" or a "creation". Instead of "In the beginning God created", it comes out more as "In the source, the androgynous host shaped".

The closest word for a singular male god was El, with a goddess being Eloh. The term used in Genesis, Elohim, is plural, with the somewhat unconventional use of the masculine plural (-im) instead of a feminine (-oth). Instead of "god", Elohim indicates more of an "androgynous host". That is to suggest it derives from:

from ’elōah goddess + īm masculine plural ending


If you do not accept the possibility of a feminine root, you cannot do away with the plural.

Whether the second word is ithbara, or just bara, is the difference between "in the beginning" or something like "in the source".

The former would say "Time has a beginning", whereas the second means the permanence of a Void, or Waters, Chaos, or Tiamat, which means there is no "beginning of time".

As one possible revision:


De Purucker translates these verses from the original Hebrew as: “In a host (or multitude), the gods (Elohim) formed themselves into the heavens and the earth. And the earth became ethereal. And darkness upon the face of the ethers. And the ruah (the spirit-soul) of the gods (of Elohim) fluttered or hovered, brooding”.


He goes on to say that “we see that the Elohim evolved man, humanity, out of themselves, and told them to become, then to enter into and inform these other creatures. Indeed, these sons of the Elohim are, in our teachings, the children of light, the sons of light, which are we ourselves, and yet different from ourselves, because higher, yet they are our own very selves inwardly. In fact, the Elohim, became, evolved into, their own offspring, remaining in a sense still always the inspiring light within, or rather above . . .


Disposing of "the beginning" is because the first word is a form of Rosh (https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-meaning-of-Bere****-Bara-Elohim):


The word, "Beresit בְּרֵאשִׁית", contain three syllables, "be'"-"resh"-"it".

The root of "Beresit" is: "rosh", meaning, "head", "first", "top" or "chief".

For example,

"The First of the Year" in Hebrew, pronounced "rosh-hashanah", literally translated as: "head of the year".

First of the month: "rosh chodesh" Top of the mountain: "rosh hahar". The Chief: "rosh hashevet". etc...

Conclusion: "rosh" or "resh" can be used as: "head" or "first" or "top" The syllable "be" or "ba", before a word can be used as, "at the", "in the" or "with".

For example:

"be ki'ta resho'nah": At the first class.


Plenty of historical figures are named Rosh, and they are not usually considered "the beginning", but "the chief".


I reviewed the Hindu sources about Varaha, looking for any more discussion about formation of the planetary crust. It is not there! Instead, it seems to be pretty consistently along these same lines, separating Earth from primordial Water. I was surprised. Modern Hindus are taking anything for proof that their texts explain newly-discovered principles like Quantum Spin, or that Ireland was an Indian colony from 11,000 B. C. E. It seems to me that people quickly and easily go too far with a hint or small idea, and publish as if fact.

Pictographic writings lack a "Rosetta stone", and so I am hesitant about interpreting Indus Script, having the same hesitancy with ancient Anatolian, even though I am aware that there are "conclusive" studies about them. The same is true for many physical phenomena, such as at one point in time, the Black Sea may have risen by a few meters, not several hundred feet. Or the earth's plates may not have slipped sideways by thousands of miles.

To an extent, some of that is only minor points, which does not detract from this thesis:



The bible is a tool for control, as it is now published. If we see what was originally meant, in the version from
Job, we see what it could have, and perhaps should have been. It would have saved a lot of lives and suffering over the millennium.


Although I might add that, in the milieu of Abrahamic faiths, Mandaeanism is going to cause problems for them all. It is the religion of Adam, and, at least at first glance, much closer to real esoteric spirituality from what is actually in its texts. The difficulty is that it is a closed society and you can't join it.

They hate violence, and, are the "same people" as the Jews, except they reject Moses and things like circumcision (violence to the body), so it shares almost nothing in common with Judaism or any other branch of this.


The "problem of evil" appears to be grossly exaggerated by Persian Manicheanism or "extreme duality", which separates half of the universe as a kind of nursery of evil and workshop of its Cosmic Father, the Devil. Such a reading is not apparent from the Mandeans or Indian sources. Instead, they clearly give a duality of a higher and lower Sun, and a higher and lower Divine Breath. So for example, you have a lower (visible) sun, and a higher (invisible, or plasma) one, which is of course quite close to the actual state of affairs, because the plasma sun can be perceived by clairvoyance.

Evil, of course, can only take place in the lower realm, which does not mean it is for this purpose, or, under command of the devil.

In fact, Indian spirituality is not comprehensible without allowing what we call "demons" to be among the most ardent devotees of divinity or Vishnu.

Similarly, if "demon" is the Greek "daimon", then for example Pistis "Faith" is a demon, meaning you are supposed to have a demonic faith in Jesus. So this is a linguistic trainwreck. But that is because people started to play with the words, rather than the meanings, which are supposed to be experiential.

So it seems we have a huge misunderstanding about the simple descent from heavenly realms to the materialized earth.

Once the devil vanishes as an imaginary fragment, what do the Abrahamists have left to offer?

Wouldn't matter, it's not worth taking.

The best I can do is try to be nice to some people who may have this in their background. In a few cases, something like Sermon on the Mount indicates a decent morality, which is a good value. To quote a nineteenth-century Indian who had been exposed, "What you teach people to do, is good, and what you teach them to believe, is foolish". It's theological dust.

[Jim_Duyer]

Thanks for all the fish.

[Eagle Eye]

You have mixed everything up. The Scriptures are so simple to understand if you read all of them. If any misunderstanding of a verse due to a bad translation, we still have other Scriptures to clear that part. With that theory of yours, you have completely gone out of all Scriptures. I will try to name some parts of Scriptures that are hard to understand:

1. Why God refers with "He" in all Scriptures. Knowing that God is omnipotent, almighty, it makes more sense to refer with He. Still we do not know (or remember) the image of God and to compare to human form is a great mistake.
2. The verses of wars. The Revelations were sent in a time of great conflicts, different groups of people were enemies to each other. We must understand that those verses are included in at least 5000 years timeline, not to mention the Book of Enoch that goes near 10,000 years. So when we read some verses might not sound actual and maybe we have passed beyond those tests, but people become impatient to read till the end and dismiss everything.
3. The story of Jesus as I have mentioned in other thread, one thing is for sure, that those verses cannot contradict other Scriptures. That's why christians have to read carefully all verses of Bible and maybe other Scriptures too, if they want to understand who was Jesus.
4. Why all Scriptures: Torah, Psalms, Bible revealed in the Holy Land and the Quran is revealed in another country and another language. Reading all Scriptures I have understood one thing, God tests His creation constantly. In other Scriptures He made us clear that He has chosen people of Israel above all populations, but with the passing of time those chosen people became arrogant, to a point to declare themselves as purest of all. So the last Revelation was in another language and in another country. What did the chosen people do?! They denied the last messenger and the last Scripture. If he isn't hebrew isn't a messenger and than the history speaks for itself. God punished them by scattering all jews around the world and denied them to pray in the temple, that's why they pray near a wall. It isn't the wall sacred, but is a reminder that they can't pray at the temple.
5. Why Muhammad? Because it is a greater probability that he is of lineage of Abraham's son. Muhammad was chosen to deliver the final Revelation which is the Quran.
6. Why Islam seem different from other Scriptures? Because of mixing of the Quran with other texts and arabic culture. It has formed a religion different from the base. Even if islam is mentioned to be the only religion revealed, it doesn't have this form we see today. Islam means to submit to God in free will. That's why it's the same religion for all. The Torah, Psalms, Bible and the Quran has one thing in common, to submit to God in free will. That is why it's the same religion, but now has divided in many branches. All of them claim to be true, but none really is, unless they join together all Scriptures and become one religion.
7. Why one God and not many gods? Because if they were at least 2 gods they would fight for claiming the dominion and we would experience catastrophic events.

[Bill Ryan]

Mod note from Bill:

Eagle Eye has now been retired from the forum. Please see this explanation (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?78116&p=1577665#post1577665) on the RECORD of MODERATOR ACTIONS (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?78116) thread.

:focus:

[Jim_Duyer]

I'm going to consider this one completed and thanks for the suggestions.
To answer one question that seems to be pending somewhat, that I did not fully answer earlier,
when translation Sumerian there are often meanings that are short, but actually are not.
For example, I was able to obtain the paragraph that I provided by using the context to fill
in the gaps. If you see table, chair, chalk, student and book, you would know it's probably a school.

And in English we have the same thing - I could say run, and some translator on some distant world far away from today in time, might write: A bipedal being, with forethought, decided to place one foot in front of the other, in rapid succession, in order to propel himself as rapidly as possible from one position to another. And it would still mean run.

Thanks again.

[ExomatrixTV]

Mod note from Bill:

Eagle Eye has now been retired from the forum. Please see this explanation (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?78116&p=1577665#post1577665) on the RECORD of MODERATOR ACTIONS (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?78116) thread.

:focus:


Also, refusing to answer my sincere & valid questions (https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?121875-Jesus-was-sent-by-God&p=1576333&viewfull=1#post1576333), which he easily could, if he was open & frank!

[Pam]

BTW - I promise to try my best not to be so scatter-brained, to look over my posts before hitting the button to publish.

I like to work on three or four language translations at the same time - sometimes in different languages - it helps my mind to focus. Don't know why - always been that way. And sometimes I forget to pull out of that gear and get back in the gear to publish content that has some order of completeness to it. Thanks.

Jim, Are you kidding? You are so appreciated here. You bring some refreshing information to the table. On top of that you have a humble nature, that I find very refreshing. Thanks for all the interesting perspectives and takes on the nature of our history.

[Jim_Duyer]

BTW - I promise to try my best not to be so scatter-brained, to look over my posts before hitting the button to publish.

I like to work on three or four language translations at the same time - sometimes in different languages - it helps my mind to focus. Don't know why - always been that way. And sometimes I forget to pull out of that gear and get back in the gear to publish content that has some order of completeness to it. Thanks.

Jim, Are you kidding? You are so appreciated here. You bring some refreshing information to the table. On top of that you have a humble nature, that I find very refreshing. Thanks for all the interesting perspectives and takes on the nature of our history.

Especially coming from a centered person such as yourself that is a deep compliment and I thank you.
And, I have some good ones coming up :sun:

[Applesprig]

Hi, About the Creation Event, I highly recommend Immanuel Velikovsky's explosive book "WORLDS IN COLLISION". (It was the book that Albert Einstein had on his desk before he died). Anyway, it is about the planet Venus which was recently captured in our solar system, It came in as a comet etc etc causing enormous damage here on earth, destroyed a once habitable Mars then settled into it's current position. It is a new planet, liquid boiling gases, bubbling volcanoes, is the only planet that rotates in the opposite direction to all the other planets.
I am going to extrapolate by suggesting that Earth too was once a comet, actually all planets come into our system as comets, after many visits to our solar system (gaining
in size each time) they are "captured" and settle down. There is much more to this if you are inclined to explore more ideas on creation.

[Applesprig]

My reply post just vanished...sorry , new computer.