What do you think of the ancient texts and artifacts that seem to describe non-h

1. 60

   Levi Legionposted 8 years ago

   What do you think of the ancient texts and artifacts that seem to describe non-human beings?
   
   If you've ever studied some of the surviving writings of different ancient civilizations (I have), you will have found an interesting common thread---that at some point in earth's history we were visited by beings "from above." Many theories have been proposed but the most credible ones suggest that an advanced race of beings made contact with humans in the past. Of course, the details may be off, but isn't it strange that all major ancient civilizations tell the same story? Have you researched this subject? If so, what do you think?
   
   

   replyreport
2. 93

   lions44posted 8 years ago

   I believe they are interpreted incorrectly.  Ancient astronaut believers are ridiculous.  Don't shortchange mankind's achievements. Most of those writings and etchings are probably religious in some way, representing the people's idea of a god.  But humans did the building, designing and hard work.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Levi Legionposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      So it's not strange that civilizations from different parts of the world have similar stories? I think you're dismissing it without a good basis. Have you ever research any ancient texts? Also, the study of DNA supports this theory.

      replyreport
3. 84

   HeadlyvonNogginposted 8 years ago

   I have researched this, and may have an answer. At least, this is what I think ...
   
   Genesis 6:1-4 - When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit will not contend with[a] humans forever, for they are mortal[b]; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.”
   
   4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.
   
   This comes just one chapter after explaining Adam's descendants live for centuries. Here humans are "mortal" in comparison to ... someone. I think there's significant supporting evidence that beings like that really showed up around 5500BC in southern Mesopotamia. They lived for centuries and were god-like in comparison to "mortal" humans. Adam created in an already populated world and showing up in their texts.
   
   I'd like to see more on these documents you're speaking of. Are you talking about the common mythologies of the Mediterranean cultures (Greek, Roman, Sumerian, Egyptian, etc)?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Levi Legionposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I've found the Summerian, Egyptian, and Hebrew texts to be the most intriguing. For instance, the Biblical book of Genesis only starts to make real sense when viewed through the perspective of an advanced race visiting earth.

      replyreport
   2. 84

      HeadlyvonNogginposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, exactly. When read in the context that there are two groups, humans and 'others', it does make way more sense. When charting out the ages given, there were long living descendants up until the time of Abraham, which makes them the 'other gods'.

      replyreport
   3. 60

      Levi Legionposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      It's weird because this perspective makes so much sense. Especially in light of the fact that in recent years more and more info is coming to the surface about extraterrestrial happenings. Previously classified info is becoming available.

      replyreport
4. 71

   Ruth Angelposted 8 years ago

   I believe that depictions of extraterrestrial beings are often misinterpreted as such. (As I had just written on another hub post), we were not physically there during this time to be able to accurately postulate what those hieroglyphs signify.  As a theory, I would say it is highly probable that life exists some where else in the Universe, because it is nonsensical to believe that in such a vastness, that we are the only living entities within the universe. But then again, it has always been of human conceit to believe that we are the divine creation and life cannot possibly exist outside of our own.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Levi Legionposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks, Ruth. I can see why you would have reservations. Even I think some things are probably inaccurat. It's just interesting that the more you study this subject, the more "dots" get connected and things start making more sense.

      replyreport
5. 61

   Findecanoposted 8 years ago

   Sorry, I know I got carried away with this answer. I apologize in advance for its length.
   I’m rather interested in all of those theories, the biblical passages for example do make for some interesting notions if you contrast one’s own modern perception with that of the people from that time.
   I think it’d be surreal if at least some of it were true, but I intensely dislike the people who see aliens in every corner, often negating that mankind has achieved great things in the process.
   I mean have you seen those shows in The History Channel? I mean, I haven’t, but I get the gist of them. Jesus, is there not a single serious channel left? I feel like television has completely forsaken the idea of educational programming in favor of the notion that sensationalist garbage is the king of post-modern days.
   It’s like those retards you see in Finding Bigfoot. You can bet your ass they believe there is a Bigfoot somewhere and that they’re gonna find it. That’s why no matter what happens, if something even slightly strange happens that they (with their obviously considerable intellect) can’t disprove, they’ll believe, oh yeah, It was Bigfoot. Of course, the thing is they can’t prove it either.
   At least when some of my professors in college addressed the matter they assured that those theories could be debunked if you saw firsthand the archeological pieces around which they revolve. Meaning they’re doctored versions of the originals used to cause stir on the internet. Still, I wouldn’t expect less from actual academic authorities.
   Now, studying them from the internet can make you conceive a bunch of fantastic ideas (which I still think are awesome to ponder about, don’t get me wrong, all I’ve said is that most people are skeptic at best and that the subject is exploited by retards in TV), and maybe it is strange that there are so many connections to be made between human traditions that often never even came into contact with each other, but we can’t just make assumptions about a past we have next to no idea about.
   For example, the theory of transatlantic commerce as an explanation for similar influences between American and Egyptian cultures (at least as far the famous pyramids go). It has some plausibility because (apparently) cocaine and tobacco, a product found only in the American continent, have been found in the remains of Egyptian mummies. Now, if that were to be proven (commerce between ancient Egyptians and Americans), where would it leave the theories that s

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Levi Legionposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I haven't watched any TV shows on the subject. The more you know about the ancient texts the more it makes sense. The Christian creation story is bunk and strict Darwinism has it's limits. That's why this subject deserves some investigation.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      Findecanoposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Well I wouldn’t classify the Christian creation story as “bunk”. I mean, we don’t even know very clearly where it comes from do we? Those stories are often plagiarized.

      replyreport
   3. 60

      Levi Legionposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      By "bunk" I mean untrue. Knowing the exact origin of a text is not vital to deeming it true or not.

      replyreport
   4. 84

      HeadlyvonNogginposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Actually, there's good reason to consider it's not bunk. The reason the story of 'beings from above' is so prevalent is because of the events those books are describing. They can be found in history. The timeline of Genesis and the events described.

      replyreport
   5. 60

      Levi Legionposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I think you misunderstand me, Jeremy. I said the CHRISTIAN VERSION is bunk. That is, that an all powerful, invisible "God" actually reached down and made clay into man and that Lucifer is evil, etc...

      replyreport
   6. 84

      HeadlyvonNogginposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Oh no, that's what I mean. What's described in Genesis happened in an already populated world. And all of those other mythologies are a testament of that. Adam was God introducing free will into the world. Civilization was the result.

      replyreport
   7. 60

      Levi Legionposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Interesting, but I don't buy it. It seems more likely that Genesis is telling the same story as the Summerian texts, as so on, rather than being a separate story. It's pretty far-fetched to say "Adam is God."

      replyreport
   8. 71

      Ruth Angelposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      The biblical explanation for creation I wouldn't so much call "plagiarism", rather scientifically relevant to its time. They had no knowledge of the world as we do today. I think they were just attempting to create a hypothesis that made sense.

      replyreport
   9. 84

      HeadlyvonNogginposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I don't buy that they're copied. It's much more likely that they shared common history and both wrote about the same events. For them to adopt the Sumerian version and put them in a timeline that lines up with actual events is unlikely.

      replyreport
   10. 61

       Findecanoposted 8 years agoin reply to this

       I think the same, “plagiarized” might have been wrong. But traditions that are passed down like that might very well explain the mysterious connections in ancient Sumerian tablets and others of the like, that speak of deities come from the skies.

       replyreport
   11. 71

       Ruth Angelposted 8 years agoin reply to this

       I have little knowledge of the ancient texts, so I cannot adequately debate within the topic. I will make it a point to research some.

       replyreport
   12. 61

       Findecanoposted 8 years agoin reply to this

       What I was really getting at with my original answer (a lot of it was cut, didn’t notice until today) is that these myths are a product of elements universal to the human experience and affect us all no matter the cultural barriers that keep us apart

       replyreport
   13. 84

       HeadlyvonNogginposted 8 years agoin reply to this

       Right, and they claim these beings taught them things we know they actually did first, before any other culture. They were one of the most prolific in inventions and give full credit to these gods they claim lived among them.

       replyreport
   14. 61

       Findecanoposted 8 years agoin reply to this

       I meant it in the sense that fertility and birth, death, natural phenomena, a magical connection to celestial bodies and animals, etc., are represented in most cultures cuz they share experiences universal to humans. It's not surprising they coincide

       replyreport
6. 84

   M. T. Dremerposted 8 years ago

   Considering all humans have common ancestry, and all great storytellers steal, it's not unreasonable to conclude that similar stories are similar because they're variations of some other story. In other words, one tribe tells the story of a man from the sky. That tribe, through time, splits into five other tribes. They carry that story with, but it gets little variations through the oral tradition. Those five then split into five more tribes each, again bringing the core of the story along for the ride. Except now the flying man has a bird head on one side of the world, and a lion's head on the other.
   
   We're simultaneously very creative and blatant plagiarizers, with a knack for exaggeration and embellishment. Every time you tell a story about something interesting that happened to you, it gets a little more fantastic, simply because we're born storytellers.
   
   Is it possible that we were visited by aliens in the past? Sure, it's possible. But these stories aren't credible enough to prove it anymore than they can prove they were actual deities.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Levi Legionposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      What you are saying is definitely a possiblity, though how a South American civilzation could have the same story as a Middle Eastern one would pose a problem. And no, maybe they can't be proven beyond doubt, but they certainly are a possibility.

      replyreport
7. 71

   Old-Empresarioposted 8 years ago

   I think 5,000 years from now people might find preserved remains of super hero comic books and plastic toys and say, "It seems the culture that preceded us had wings, magic powers and many other odd characteristics". Pictures only tell a story. It doesn't mean the story is real.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Levi Legionposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      True, but it also doesn't mean they have to be fictional. The idea that extraterrestrials have at some point vistited our planet is not too far-fetched to be dismissed. Thanks for your opinion.

      replyreport