.
VR
Were there vampires in the bible
General Discussion
•  General Discussion Home  •   Forums Home  •



mindgeeee
mindgeeee
Ethereal Being (31)
Posts: 62
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Member of Legion (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 13 years.
04:47:35 Sep 07 2012
Read 3,967 times

Did vampires exists in the bible
Was cain transform into a vampire after he killed able.




•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
18:37:49 Sep 07 2012
Read 3,945 times

Question #1 Yes... but not as found in fiction.

Question #2 No... Humans, not actual Vampires, are the only truly bloodthirsty hominid species



•  REPLY  •


Kingblackbelt
Kingblackbelt
Sire (105)
Posts: 2,111
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 13 years.
21:08:03 Sep 07 2012
Read 3,936 times

im pretty sure that cain was either a vampire or a demon



•  REPLY  •


Zom
Zom

No Longer Registered
22:58:46 Sep 07 2012
Read 3,929 times

None that I have ever heard of. Certainly not the living-dead, long fanged, blood sucking type.



•  REPLY  •


Severus
Severus
Sire (107)
Posts: 517
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
02:09:26 Sep 08 2012
Read 3,919 times

Well that's because Vampires were none of those things prior to the middle ages. Go back to the classical era and before, what you will see are vampires that are described as demons or human half breads who feed on the spirit not the flesh. This is because Real Vampires are Psionic or psi in nature.
Most of what vampires have become to be known as are due to the churches attempt to scare people and book writers attempts to do the same.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
02:32:44 Sep 08 2012
Read 3,917 times

Where can one find this information, Severus. I can't recall ever having heard that Vampires were written about prior to the coining of that term in 1047 CE. And if they were, how can we know they were vampires if the term, itself, didn't exist?

Thanks in advance for your help with this.



•  REPLY  •


Severus
Severus
Sire (107)
Posts: 517
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
08:03:42 Sep 08 2012
Read 3,907 times

History is full of Sanguinary and spirit robbing/devouring creatures which are associated most people would recognize there inclusion with vampirism. A fact you very well know, creature like...


Incubus - comes from Mesopotamia, Sumerian King List, ca. 2400 BC

Jiang Shi - comes from China, Chinese folklore, ca. 1100 AD

Limia - comes from Balkan Peninsula, Greek myth, ca. 800 BC

Vetala - comes from India, Hindu mythology, ca. 1000 AD

Which are just a few of the more commonly known ones, But there are many that are much older.

A basic Vampire search of Wikipedia would have given anyone who really cared to know the history of Ancient Vampirism, or the roots of the Catholic churches influence over the Legends we as western/European culture know of today.

Here I'll make it easy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vampire



•  REPLY  •


Doru
Doru
Premiere Sire (128)
Posts: 1,197
Honor: 387
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 18 years.
18:14:36 Sep 08 2012
Read 3,898 times

In The Book of Enoch, VII CHAP. VII. [SECT. II. 2], states, in part:

2. "And when the angels, the sons of heaven, beheld them, they became enamoured of them, saying to each other, Come, let us select for ourselves wives from the progeny of men, and let us beget children."


14. "And began to injure birds, beasts, reptiles, and fishes, to eat their flesh one after another, and to drink their blood."

Different historian believe that the "angels" were alien's from another world. Nonetheless, the offspring were believed to be "vampires".



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
21:33:25 Sep 08 2012
Read 3,890 times

Severus:

Thank you... and, of course, I am aware of all these. My point in asking the question was to illicit just such a response so that I could then ask you (and all others who would have responded similarly) the next question:

As none of these mythological beings were called "vampires"... why do you equate them with such? What is your reasoning that has you calling these beings "vampires"?

And to help speed things along and given that you kind of already answered this question in your last response, I'm going to pre-suppose you will reply in essence as follows: "Because these were claimed to feed off Human blood or energy, thus they are forms of 'vampire.'"


And to that I would then ask the following question:

"But... what makes drinking blood or feeding off energy 'vampiric'? How do we know that those are the traits of the 'Vampire'? How do you arrive at this conclusion?"









•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
21:45:24 Sep 08 2012
Read 3,889 times

Doru:

Thanks for that. And yes, the Book of Enoch does state that. Of course, the far-earlier Book of Genesis, written more than a thousand years before the Book of Enoch, contradicts the Book of Enoch. Genesis 6:1-4 describes these same Watcher children as ancient heroes... as "mighty men as of old, men of renown."

Then we fast forward over a thousand years, far past the time of these events... and now they are called giants and cannibals that drank blood and ate flesh.

My question to you would be... if the writers of Genesis (or any other Biblical author, for that matter) never once mentioned any such blood-drinking, flesh-eating traits, but instead described these same children in glowing terms... why should we put greater stock in the contradictory and demonizing statements made some unknown author of the Book of Enoch written over a thousand years later?








•  REPLY  •


Severus
Severus
Sire (107)
Posts: 517
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
02:08:28 Sep 09 2012
Read 3,883 times

We call a flat screen plasma TV a television even though it machanically has almost nothing in common with the orgininal tube television from the 1930s... outide of how it is ultimated used. It's final purpose is the why and how behind the reasoning for seeing it for what it is.

How something evolves and what it evoles into can have very little in common but they are related none the less. To look at legend, local folklore, Biblical prophecy, or any other written history and see common thread which can be traced back to a come source is hard and pain staking work but the evidence is always there. In the mordern age with the power of the internet it is almost easy for people to do this because it's already there by someone elses hand... you are simple required to read it and make an educated choice based on the fact before you. Now I'm not saying trust everything wiki say as fact but if the history is valid the the reporting is likely to be as well. Like I said a 10 minute google Wiki search into vampire would educate most people far beyond what they started this thread with.



•  REPLY  •


NikkiAidyn
NikkiAidyn
Royal Sire (214)
Posts: 17,306
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
The Coven of Temples of The Ancient Egyptian Pharaohs is a member of an Alliance

Member of The Coven of Temples of The Ancient Egyptian Pharaohs
Vampire Rave member for 14 years.
02:13:01 Sep 09 2012
Read 3,880 times

There were some mentions of blood drinkers, but the word vampire wasn't used. But there is the reference of how Christians drink the Blood of Christ.



•  REPLY  •


Severus
Severus
Sire (107)
Posts: 517
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
02:52:49 Sep 09 2012
Read 3,876 times

Ok...
First Paragraph of the topic search "vampire" - Wikipedia:

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vampire *


"Vampires are mythological or folkloric beings who subsist by feeding on the life essence (generally in the form of blood) of living creatures, regardless of whether they are undead or a living person/being. Although vampiric entities have been recorded in many cultures, and go back to prehistoric times, the term vampire was not popularized until the early 18th century, after an influx of vampire superstition into Western Europe from areas where vampire legends were frequent, such as the Balkans and Eastern Europe, although local variants were also known by different names."


Folk beliefs


The notion of vampirism has existed for millennia; cultures such as the Mesopotamians, Hebrews, Ancient Greeks, and Romans had tales of demons and spirits which are considered precursors to modern vampires. However, despite the occurrence of vampire-like creatures in these ancient civilizations, the folklore for the entity we know today as the vampire originates almost exclusively from early-18th-century southeastern Europe,[8] when verbal traditions of many ethnic groups of the region were recorded and published.



Ancient beliefs


Tales of supernatural beings consuming the blood or flesh of the living have been found in nearly every culture around the world for many centuries. Today, we would associate these entities with vampires, but in ancient times, the term vampire did not exist; blood drinking and similar activities were attributed to demons or spirits who would eat flesh and drink blood; even the Devil was considered synonymous with the vampire. Almost every nation has associated blood drinking with some kind of revenant or demon, or in some cases a deity.


Christianity


With the arrival of Christianity in Greece, and other parts of Europe, the vampire "began to take on decidedly Christian characteristics." As various regions of the continent converted to Christianity, the vampire was viewed as "a dead person who retained a semblance of life and could leave its grave-much in the same way that Jesus had risen after his death and burial and appeared before his followers." In the Middle Ages, the Christian Church reinterpreted vampires from their previous folk existence into minions of Satan, and used an allegory to communicate a doctrine to Christians: "Just as a vampire takes a sinner's very spirit into itself by drinking his blood, so also can a righteous Christian by drinking Christ's blood take the divine spirit into himself." The interpretation of vampires under the Christian Church established connotations that are still associated in the vampire genre today. For example, the "ability of the cross to hurt and ward off vampires is distinctly due to its Christian association."


Not only does this verify what I said in my original posting but they go one set farther... They then literally break down vampire beliefs through out history by region.



•  REPLY  •


Severus
Severus
Sire (107)
Posts: 517
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
06:17:51 Sep 09 2012
Read 3,866 times

Upir,

"But... what makes drinking blood or feeding off energy 'vampiric'? How do we know that those are the traits of the 'Vampire'? How do you arrive at this conclusion?"

I already know where your going with this... clever.
Someone is hurting for a real and stimulating conversation. lol

Fine I'll play along...

What makes a Chicago deep dish, a New York style, and a thin crust, all qualify as "pizza"??
Not only do they have little in common with each other but none of them have anything in common with a traditional Italian style pizza... Which actually comes from 15th century China, not Italy.

Answer: The ingredient

The Conclusion is arrived at by centuries of study by those who know the folklore, know the history, and have reach a consensus of opinion. Like the pizza, the evolution of what we know of today may have different portions and sizes but the essence is the same.
Just because the term "pizza" was coined and popularized in the 1940s doesn't mean that the roots can not be traced back to China.
I doubt that anyone looking at the history would try to make the argument that prior to the term "Pizza" that the food it's self could not have existed simply because the name is different. The same is true for those how truly know the history of vampirism.



•  REPLY  •


xTaintedAngelx
xTaintedAngelx
Nightmare (97)
Posts: 2,434
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Member of The Coven of Purgatory
Vampire Rave member for 21 years.
20:05:19 Sep 09 2012
Read 3,854 times

I found some sites, that mention some parts of drinking blood, or what have you, now whether it means as in the term, vampire or just the idea of drinking blood, eating flesh is bad all the way around.

I feel that the mentioning in the bible is just the Christians way of telling us what is right, and what is wrong... at Communion don't they say "Drink of this, for it is the blood of Christ"? If they are so set against the drinking of blood, why the hell do they say something like that, or is it because they say it is the blood of Christ that makes it alright to do.

I'm not one for going to church, I did when I was younger and did all the goody two shoe stuff, but then I grew up and my parents raised us to be the type of people to do what we wanted, to believe what we wanted. I'm not saying I don't believe there is a higher being, I just don't need to go to church to believe or have somebody tell me that is what I should believe.

Anyway, here are the sites that I found pertaining to the bible and vampires or blood drinking:
http://www.openbible.info/topics/vampires
http://egotvonline.com/2011/06/08/mythical-creatures-mentioned-in-the-bible/ (have to scroll down a bit to find the passage)

As to Cain being the first Vampire... who knows because he isn't really talked about in the Bible except for that he was a child of Adam, he killed his brother, and he built Enoch... after that he is mentioned no more. So he was cursed and cast out, ok, but what the hell does that mean? If he was the first vampire, he would be talked about as being a demon or other such thing, but he isn't, the same thing with Lilith... who was she?

Here are some sites that I found that pertain to Cain:
http://www.hellhorror.com/vampires/vampire_origin/
http://www.mahalo.com/how-to-become-a-vampire/

These are just some sites, I'm sure there are more, but I have taken up enough space and enough of your time. This is only my opinion on the subject... believe what you will.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
23:40:37 Sep 09 2012
Read 3,844 times

Severus, I was not being "clever"; I was attempting to engage your critical thinking skills. If this is being "clever," then apparently all legit science can likewise be dismissed as "clever" machinations by dubiously motivated subversives likewise seeking to disturb and disrupt the intellectual status quo. For your part, I would have hoped this would be preferred over simply parroting a Wikipedia article as authoritative on the subject rather than be forced to actually... think. ;)

We both know that dictionaries, encyclopediae (e.g., Wikipedia) do nothing but simply synopsize the current consensus regarding a particular word or topic. I have already acknowledged that current consensus of a "Vampire" defines such as an undead blood-drinker (the trait of being an "energy feeder" came far later, still), though this is based only on anecdotal accounts and Western fictions begun only as far back as the 18th Century. And yet... the term "Vampire" (Upir) pre-exists any such stories or definitions by... over 700 years (pre 1047 CE).

And there is the rub... the enormous chronological chasm... that cannot be bridged if that definition is accurate. And therefore, there is the key question that no Vampirologist has been able to answer: What were "Vampires" for the 700+ years before they were (supposedly) blood drinkers?

The term "Vampire" (the English linguistic equivalent of the original Russian/Slavic word "Upir") was first written in 1047 CE, though the Russian Primary Chronicle places it as far earlier than this and states that "Upyri" (the plural of Upir) were literally worshipped by the Slavs prior to the arrival of and forced submission to Christianity to the region, thus indicating "Upyri" were regarded as supernatural to some extent by local populaces. Yet there is not a single account of these "Vampires" being evil, much less drinking blood or energy feeding off anyone. And, in 1047 CE, one of these was actually an Eastern Orthodox Christian Priest, for so he called himself.

Further, as has been noted by every major Vampirologist (i.e., actual sociologists and anthropologists specializing in Cental-Eastern-European-and/or-Russian history), they have found there is no evidence of any account of blood-drinking except beginning in the early18th Century... and from that point on, despite such accounts appearing, these same scientists have unanimously concluded that these beliefs and the stories resulting from such were entirely attributable to the medical ignorance of such local populations regarding decomposition of the Human body.

The point is... even after the blood-drinking stories began in the 18th Century, not a single shred of actual evidence has ever been found validating any of it... while all the actual evidences have unanimously caused sociologists and anthropologists to conclude all such was as the result of medical ignorance.

(For the actual references to all of the above, simply read my profile; it's all there.)

Thus... the idea of Vampires as blood-drinkers has already been scientifically debunked! Vampires were not and never have been blood-drinkers.

So... the glaring question remains even more relevant today than ever before: What defines a Vampire ?!


As for your pizza analogy: As should be glaringly obvious, this is no analogy at all unless you wish to argue that, as with Vampires, pizzas have likewise never been actually found and no evidence has ever been discovered that shows them possessing any of the more-contemporary attributes we use to define them today. Further, if I'm not mistaken, we feed on pizzas... not they on us.

And given these glaring analogous inconsistencies... seems to me this is a prime example of you being clever and attempting to dodge the central question previously asked: How do we know that blood-drinking/energy-feeding are actually vampiric traits... as regards actual Vampires?


And, as all the actual historical evidences show, if the historical Vampire was not a blood-drinker or energy-feeder, then we cannot go searching through history seeking Vampires by looking for these traits, traits that real Vampires never actually had.



- Upir'



•  REPLY  •


Zom
Zom

No Longer Registered
00:31:40 Sep 10 2012
Read 3,839 times

Communion is done as a remembrance for the sacrifice made by Christ.

The drinking of wine (most churches today use grape juice) does represent the blood of Christ but, this is done ONLY as a remembrance.

Christ never condoned the actual drinking of His blood or the blood of anyone else.

The same goes for the breaking of bread (as the other half of communion).



•  REPLY  •


Severus
Severus
Sire (107)
Posts: 517
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
06:51:55 Sep 10 2012
Read 3,823 times

I'm not really sure how to answer that.
I mean you said it yourself... Dictionaries, encyclopedia like Wikipedia simply synopsis of the topic. But if all the background reaserch of the scientific community that went into that Summery is questionable because you don't personally happen to believe in the synopsis then what could I ever say that would make a difference??

Chronological gaps in history are the result of societal and cultural set backs, the down fall of Empires. None of those things are in the control of men... past or present. These "problems" exist regardless of the topic... God, Dinosaurs, Atlantis, The Pyramids, the Missing Link, Darwinism, Global Warming, the list simply goes on and on.
That's our lot in life and the way our history was documented, the fact that it doesn't sit well with someone doesn't change that.
If you go back far enough (and in some cases that's not very far) you will run into a this problem, lack of evidence or information exists in all things at some point.

That's what Scientific theory is, and asking for a hard link to String theory or some proof of God verses proof of evolution, or in this case the exact origin of vampires is something that stretches our knowledge past what is presentable. It requires educated men to look at the chain of events and decide what is expectable based on the sum total.

In some cases thee, "looks like a fish, smells like a fish, tastes like a fish" approach is all you get. That's why Science is wrong so often, and that's why they get a free pass when they are.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
08:53:56 Sep 10 2012
Read 3,818 times

Despite your implications here, I have not offered my opinion contrary to the actual evidences. Instead, I have done just the opposite: have provided the actual evidences as the basis for my as-yet-unanswered questions to you.

The evidences show that Vampires never drank blood. This is the conclusion of all doctorate-level Slavicist sociologists and anthropologists (one of whom, Dr. Paul Barber, is a medical doctor) who have published on the subject of "Vamprism" (e.g., Dr. Jan Perkowski, Dr. Bruce McClelland, Dr. Alan Dundes, Dr. Paul Barber).

Dr. Sabina Ispas, herself a Romanian professor of Slavic Ethnography and Folklore, declared during her own address at the 2000 World Dracula Congress that "...there are no bloodsuckers in Romanian tradition" (as you ought to know, Transylvania... the definitive homeland of the actual Slavic Vampire... is in Romania).

Countering all of this, you continue to ignore these real-life experts and, instead, parade about holding up Wikipedia as the only counter to all such actual experts. Wikipedia also has several entries on all sorts of other superstitions, too. Should we, likewise believe that Snow White, the Frog King and the Big Bad Wolf were real and as described in such... because Wikipedia as an entry on them?


You then attempt to dismiss as irrelevant the 700+ year time gap between when the term "Vampire" was coined and when first connected with blood-drinking by comparing this gap with other time gaps in history for which we have little to no information. However, this analogy... like its predecessor in your previous entry... is not relevant, and here's why:

Every example you gave (with the exception of Atlantis, for which we have no evidence whatsoever besides its mention in Plato's philosophical allegory) refers to actual events or places for which we have evidence both then and now or exactly who and what they are. However, with Vampires... we have nothing concrete, no bodies, nor even the blood-drained bodies of alleged victims, either. With Vampires, we've never found an actual immortal undead blood-sucker (using your definition of such) to study. Had we found any such, then any time-line gaps would be as irrelevant to discovering their nature as they are to all the examples you gave. And for the same reason! For example: we don't need to figure out what the Pyramids of Giza were given that we have them to study all we like! Therefore, a gap in time doesn't keep us from discovering their characteristics. Not so with Vampires... thus the analogy you give is not relevant.

With Vampires, to understand who and what they might have been since we don't have one to study today, we need to "start at the very beginning" to try to understand what the term "Vampire" meant when first coined. Only then can we hope to identify what the actual Vampire characteristics were.

Now, for an analogy that is relevant, let's pick another myth that is very popular today yet for which we have no direct evidence. Let's choose that of ... Jesus Christ.

Now, imagine were we to discover that prior to the 3rd Century CE, there was no belief or reference to Jesus having risen from the grave. Prior to three centuries after his death, we only find references to him dying and that's it. Then... suddenly over three hundred years later, accounts are discovered that for the first time create the myth that Jesus rose from the tomb. Wouldn't this seriously call into question whether Jesus actually resurrected? Wouldn't this cause historians to strongly consider that the whole resurrection story was a 4th Century invention used to help bolster the newly formed, uniformly orthodoxized (catholic) Christian Church? Oh... you betcha, it would! And rightly so.

And that's exactly the case where Vampires as bloodsuckers are concerned... except here we're talking a 700+ year gap from the first Slavic usage of the term up until the time when they were first called bloodsuckers in the early 18th Century.

And as I previously mentioned, this blood-drinking characteristic has already been debunked by actual medical and ethnographic evidences. We even know exactly why they were called blood-suckers, too... which had nothing to do with anyone actually seeing a "vampire" drinking blood (no one outside of fiction or fables has ever reported seeing that)! Instead, as Dr. Paul Barber minutely details in his book "Vampires, Burial and Death: Folklore and Reality", the actual accounts "never once mentions blood-sucking. This supposed trait seems to be merely a folkloric means of accounting for two things: unexplained deaths and the appearance of blood on the mouth of a corpse." As he goes on to prove, the "blood" observed was not blood at all... but instead dark liquids brought about during the natural decomposition process following death.


So... again... as no blood-drinking was ever actually reported in the actual Slavic myths where the term "Vampire" was actually created... what were Vampires known for prior to the 18th Century when medical ignorance first caused local populations to incorrectly conclude Vampires were drinking blood?

Only until THAT question is addressed and answered (and, yes, there is an answer... and one that provides the singular trait, the "dark gift" for which Vampires throughout all Slavic lands and also Greece, Asia Minor [Turkey] and Russia, were known from the earliest times up to and including the 20th Century), can we hope to actually define who and what a real Vampire is.

And only then can we look back into history and other cultures (e.g., the Bible) to see whether real Vampires can be found.







•  REPLY  •


Doru
Doru
Premiere Sire (128)
Posts: 1,197
Honor: 387
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 18 years.
14:54:45 Sep 10 2012
Read 3,811 times

Upir,

The Book of Genesis and The Book of Enoch are just that, two different books written to record different historical reflections possessing the prejudices and biases of their unique authors.

The Book of Genesis or the First Book of Hebrew Scripture or The Law of Moses or whatever name you may find it called historically. This book divulges the creation of the world and the basic theological teachings of core christianity.

The Book of Enoch is a record of the Watchers and Nephiliam and their destruction by the hand of God. Nonetheless, Genesis mentions briefly what The Book of Enoch covers in great detail, so they are connected.



•  REPLY  •


Doru
Doru
Premiere Sire (128)
Posts: 1,197
Honor: 387
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 18 years.
14:56:16 Sep 10 2012
Read 3,810 times

Read Genesis 6:1-2 to see the connection.



•  REPLY  •


Severus
Severus
Sire (107)
Posts: 517
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
16:24:20 Sep 10 2012
Read 3,803 times

Ok upir,

So I attempted to help others with where to find some simple and basic history and knowledge about vampires beyond The Hollywood verison for no other reason than to point out that they were not all legends about blood drinkes.

Then you ask me for more specific cases, again I give some as in the Incubus legends.

Then having no clue as to what your point is or what fact you hope to have me provide to make my point about them being PSI in nature youdo a 180 and say I was right, but you didn't like the manner is which I reached my conclutions.

There were people in this thread that could not find what I was saying even though I gave them the site address. But you want me to write out a completed history. You accuse me of writting off researchers and scientists because I didn't qoute them, because I was to general.
I'm one of the few people on this site which actually has a clue... and tries whole heartedly to win the hearts and minds of those who are lost.

Do me a FLAVOR!!
Next time you're gonna throw someone under the bus, at least make sure they have their will up to date.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
18:42:53 Sep 10 2012
Read 3,798 times

Doru,

Just because Genesis and Enoch talk about the same general subject and time period doesn't make them both equally authoritative on that subject.

If I, today, decide to write a book about...let's say...the Crusades and do so in first person, calling myself by the name of a famous Knight Templar and tell a tale of fantastical creatures, angels and demons...maybe a dragon or two thrown in for good measure, would you consider my book factual?

No? Why not? I'd be writing about the same time period as those who wrote about the Crusades a thousand years ago. What's the difference that would have you placing more stock in writings obtained near the time of the actual events, themselves, than in my book that has me pretending to be one of the actual participants in those events?

Of course...the answer is glaringly obvious: my book is an obvious work of fiction given that I am pretending to be someone who lived and died a thousand years before I was born! Further, I'm talking about fantastical beings never once mentioned in any account from those times.

And that...right there...is the exact reason why Genesis and Enoch can't be considered connected, either.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
18:51:00 Sep 10 2012
Read 3,795 times

The Book of Enoch claims to be an account written by Enoch, himself, and told in first person... over a thousand years AFTER Enoch's time.

Further...as I have already gone to great lengths to make crystal clear... the Book of Enoch directly contradicts the Book of Genesis that describes the children of the Watchers as "mighty men...of renown" (i.e., great heroes acclaimed a such by all) and not cannibalistic giants as does the Book of Enoch written by someone NOT Enoch over a thousand years later.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
19:21:21 Sep 10 2012
Read 3,793 times

Severus,

I apologize if you felt I "threw you under the bus." Such was not my intention any more than it was yours when you first responded by having it seem I was considering my views more important than the evidences...which was what prompted my most recent reply.

And yes...you are and have always been a much-needed voice of reason and moderation here who is as valuable to all as you are rare for so being.



•  REPLY  •


Doru
Doru
Premiere Sire (128)
Posts: 1,197
Honor: 387
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 18 years.
13:58:03 Sep 11 2012
Read 3,781 times

Upir, I always enjoy your passion for every thread you choose to comment on, yet, as usual, do not agree with your conclusions, at least, some of the time. That is why people have different opinions.

Nonetheless, just because Genesis and Enoch do not mirror each other word for word, it does not cast a shadow on the other for credibility. I believe and therefore allege that each piece of literary writings should be examined for the life they breathe into the understanding history, not just the shadow some may choose to cast on them.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
21:02:53 Sep 11 2012
Read 3,771 times

Doru,

Thank you...and I am impressed by the passion you have for your beliefs...despite whatever the evidences might be.

Given that passion, I don't suppose pointing out that their differences were never the issue will matter much to you. Nor that what does matter is the 1000+ year separation between the two accounts making it chronologically impossible for a First Century BCE account to portray more accurately events that occurred no less than 1500 years earlier...and for that same 1st Century author to claim to actually be that same Enoch who lived over 1500 years before the Book beating his name was even written.

Out of curiosity... how's does your passion reconcile this in your mind? What's the thought process whereby you are able to cognitively dismiss this so as to continue holding onto your belief in this area?




•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
21:55:15 Sep 11 2012
Read 3,766 times

Doru (cont'd),

Or are there other factors or evidences not yet presented to help explain why we should consider the Book of Enoch an accurate presentation of events from over a millennium earlier?

Looking forward to any such you might have to provide. Thanx!



•  REPLY  •


Kaliopy
Kaliopy
Grave Robber (22)
Posts: 10
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Wolves of Odin (Coven) is a member of an Alliance

Member of Wolves of Odin (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 13 years.
20:19:27 Sep 17 2012
Read 3,720 times

I believe Cain was some sort of demon. Interesting thought, mentioned in one of the replies...about how the bible mentions drinking the blood of Christ. Food for thought! Literally or not!



•  REPLY  •


erebus0
erebus0

No Longer Registered
20:24:23 Sep 19 2012
Read 3,688 times

or maybe cain just was a jealous brother with more muscle then brain



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
23:53:14 Sep 19 2012
Read 3,682 times

Another "Occam's Razor" kinda guy. Fully agree, erebus. Nothing about Cain indicates supernatural origins or abilities. He simply personifies greed taken to its most destructive degree (destructive to both perpetrator and victim alike...as such extreme narsissistic selfishness always is.



•  REPLY  •


Sinistra
Sinistra
Carnal Creature (56)
Posts: 120
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Coven of Elizabeth Batory is a member of an Alliance

Member of Coven of Elizabeth Batory
Vampire Rave member for 15 years.
19:18:55 Sep 21 2012
Read 3,661 times

You know Upir I have asked many in the Vampire Community who you are and you are on their friends list and no one and I mean no one knows exactly who you are. Do you wish no one to acknowledge you? You do have a command of the English language that puts some off because rather than always give definitive answers you parrot information that at best is copied and not necessarily the facts. Vampire is one word in one region of the world and stems from a language base that not all countries used in the past. Not everyone agrees where it comes from. I have seen what Laurence Gardner said about how the church used these superstitions to scare the peasants. Being legalistic over one word doesn't get to the facts. (I am not trying to offend you by the way, just curious about some things)

I don't like to have to give links to everything I say and I won't because I have studied and read many things over my fairly long lifetime. If vampires were nothing more than those who drank blood then the case for that wouldn't be debated upon. Vampires are those that prey on things outside themselves to sustain their own life if you could call it that according to folklore and fiction. Those that believe themselves to be actual living vampires for want of any other term believe something else. Some drink blood and they are a minority in all actuality and others take in energy from various sources and not just one depending on the individual. I have read in folklore of some identified as vampires that do sustain themselves on lifeforce energy. It would depend on how you identify what they are exactly. In countries that didn't understand the dying process it was blood drinkers and in modern times anything no matter if originally called a demon or something else, is now identified as a vampire because of the correlation to blood and nothing more. This is all over the world.

As for Cain I believe he was the first to have what we now call a birthmark and that is all it was but there is no proof of anything about that and it is highly doubtful he was a vampire because it clearly states "God" did not kill him. Some of the other stuff about angels is debated by various scholarly sources and they don't all agree what some of the words mean. This could end up a lecture if I went into all of that. I have read researches by others that have been done for over 20 years as well and the conclusions are not the same...so I guess it is whomever you wish to believe is correct. Anyway about Cain:

"Speculations abound about this mark, ranging from the practical to the absurd. Among the practical suggestions is the idea that God gave Cain a distinguishing characteristic that would warn people not to harm him. Others believe that the "mark" was a sign to Cain alone of a promise of God's protection and not a warning to others at all.

The Hebrew word for "mark" is 'owth. Both meanings are possible—a warning to anyone who would harm Cain, as well as a banner or sign from God to Cain. The Bible does not clearly distinguish how we are to understand 'owth in this context. It is clear that God did not exact the death penalty that Cain deserved for murdering his brother Abel. However, the Bible does not say when or how Cain died.

Some believe that the wording of Genesis 4:23-24 implies that Lamech eventually murdered him. If that is true, whatever the mark of Cain was, God removed His protection. Perhaps He limited it to keeping someone from murdering Cain in revenge for the murder of Abel—but did not prevent anyone from killing him for some other reason."

Taken from the United Church of God
http://www.ucg.org/bible-faq/what-was-mark-cain

For the most part I have to agree with Severus.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
21:39:59 Sep 21 2012
Read 3,655 times

Sinistra: "Vampires are those that feed off of others outside themselves to sustain their lives."

Doesn't this rather describe all animal life forms on this planet?

However you slant definitions to describe...in essence...beings who parasitically feed off of Humans either through blood or "energy", you will find no such portrayals for "vampires" (also: vampir, vampyr, upir, upyr, upyri, mullo, strygoi, etc.) prior to the 18th Century CE... yet these terms far pre-date that century. And there is the unavoidable anachronism that reveals such a definition to be the far-later re-definition of the term that it actually is.

As I have pointed out: there is only one specific characteristic ascribed to the Vampire that is found everywhere in Eastern/Central Europe, Russia and even Asia Minor that goes all the way back to the word's origin: his "insatiable sexuality."



•  REPLY  •


Doru
Doru
Premiere Sire (128)
Posts: 1,197
Honor: 387
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 18 years.
01:35:42 Sep 24 2012
Read 3,628 times

I found the following information to be interesting concerning vampires:


"Some of the earliest evidence of Ritual Vampirism comes from Tartaria in Transylvania and stems to the fifth millennium BC. Remains of a human body were found buried in a fire pit along with clay tablets upon which were inscribed the names of the ’Sumerian’ god Enki and the ranking number of Father Anu. The language was subsequently termed ’proto-Sumerian’ and represented some of the earliest written artifacts yet to be found.

The descendants of these early vampires were the Sacred Ubaid Race who, one millennium later, settled Mesopotamia and founded the Anunnaki religion of the Sumerians in 3500 BC. Their Transylvanian ancestors were the Anunnaki Gods themselves.

Various suggestions have been proposed in an attempt to explain the origin and meaning of the word vampire. One recent suggestion was that it was applied to a group of ’Watchers’ (Seers - Derkesthai: Dragons) who had occupied a settlement near "lake Van", in Urartu - Armenia. The original location - Greater Scythia - is faultless, the association is without error but the etymology is unresearched and the philology is completely absent.

Although that author’s suggested identification between Watchers and Vampires is absolutely correct, the word vampire does not in any sense relate to their former geographical location or origin but, as we shall see, rather to the vampires’ social and spiritual identity and status within a given cultural framework, which in this instance was Scythian, overlaid on Celtic.

In the journals of the 17th century cleric, the Abbé Calmet, the word vampire is transliterated into its most common, and its earlier, central European form which is spelt either oupire or oupere. These spellings are common in literature of Calmet’s time and represent the original form of the word vampire.

When the word migrated into Latin from Anatolian the u became a v because, as we will recall, there is no u character represented in the Latin alphabet. If there had been, then the Latinized western European construction of the word would have been uampire. By now bells should be ringing in the readers’ heads as they remember hearing about wampires somewhere or another, perhaps in a humorous context.

The Romans didn’t have a w and this letter appeared in clerical Latin during the medieval period as v v, as presented in the ridiculous phrase mortvvs svm. The vv being used then as a long vowel sound to differentiate between u and v sounds which were both represented by the Latin v.

So to recap, let’s have a look at the linguistic migration so far: oupere - oupire - owpire - ovpire. At this point we must remember that the word migrated from one language into another at a time when the most commonly used form of transmission was oral. This was bound to lead to confusion when the word was written down for the first time, as it has in numerous other instances.

By now we should be asking "If the word vampire was originally spelt oupire, where on earth did the ’m’ come from?" All the author can say is thank heavens for the anomalous ’m’ because it is this component that really confirms the origin and meaning of the word vampire, according to currently accepted scholarship.

Philologists would agree that the word vampire, as oupere, in its present form originated from the Turkish word uber, which means ’witch’. This would appear to present even more problems because in addition to an anomalous ’m’, we now also have a ’b’ to explain away! Nevertheless the author promises you that tenacity and perseverance will bring its own rewards, so be patient and do try and keep up.

Leaving the ’m’ aside for a moment, there would seem to be a serious linguistic problem in that oupere is spelt with a ’p’ and uber is spelt with a ’b’, which the reader might suspect would undermine the connection between both words. Especially as vampire or oupere is European and uber is Turkish and thus from a separate language group. However, this is not so.

As the Turkic-Uralic language is very different from Indo-European, it would appear that the word vampire in its original form is not Indo-European, but an Asiatic word that has changed in spelling and pronunciation during the passage of time and its migration northward.

It might then appear that the central Asian word for a witch - uber - would mean something entirely different to the European meaning of the word ’witch’ and would therefore bring with it an entirely different set of cultural and mythic associations. However, what the reader might not realize is that modern Turkey and its language is, like any other, an evolutionary compilation of historical, linguistic and cultural influences.

Prior to being named Turkey, Asia Minor or Anatolia was the centre of the eastern Roman Empire of Byzantium. At the heart of Asia Minor, contemporary with Rome but originating from an earlier period still, was the vast region of Galatia at the heart of which was a region occupied in the Persian era by the Cimmerians of Scythia, at a time when Galilee, Gilead and Gaulatinis in northern Israel were Scythian territories named after their language.

As Galatia spread northwards it bordered upon Phrygia and Troy and reached out further still to become Galati as it crossed the Bosphorus and encompassed Transylvania. On its westward marches Galati assimilated both Bulgaria and Gaul.

In consequence of this, a massive proportion of what is now called Turkey was in fact, along with most of Europe, a Gaelic or properly a Goidelic speaking, Scythian/Celtic civilization, comprising of independent tribal groups who spoke a number of Gaelic dialects, amongst which and most notably are what we now know as the so called ’P’ and ’Q’ or ’K’ Goidelic language variants.

The P and Q variants in Brythonic-Cymric (Welsh) and Goidelic-Scotic (Irish Scots), as an example, mean that the word ’son’ will be spelt map in Cymric and mac in Scotic. Furthermore there is a sub variant in this language group where ’P’ and ’B’ sounds also become interchangeable, as in the Welsh pen as in the mountain - Penllithrig’y’wrach - meaning "the slippery hill of the witch" in Snowdonia, and the Scots ben as in Ben Nevis in Scotland - both of which mean ’head’ or ’peak’. The Cymric language was originally Cimmerian or northern Scythian, whilst Scotic is a southern Scythian dialect.

The Galatian word uber is from the Scythian goidelic group whilst in Russia and Poland, which was influenced by the Cimmerian or Brythonic group, the same word for vampire is spelt upyr and upior respectively. There have been numerous Scythian migrations over the millennia and the Gaelic language has been carried across the Eurasian continent to influence the languages of many peoples. The Trojans who lived next door to the Galatians and were themselves Scythians moved to Italy and became the Latines.

As we can see by this example, the b has consistently become a v and this is how we know that the word for a vampire uber, is not a Turkish word at all but Gaelic or Galatian. Remember the anomalous ’m’ in vampire? Well it just so happens that in dialectic Gaelic the consonant group Mh is pronounced V. The ’h’ became discarded over time and left the ’m’ in vampire where the ’u’ or ’v’ should be. If spelt literally vampire would be uavber, uauber or uaupir, which is the central European oupire or oupere.

These variants stem from the Sanskrit upari (Up-Ari or Up-Arya, meaning Over-Lord) for which the Greek is uper - uper - which, as we have already seen, is a component of super in Latin. Over (ME - ouere) began as a graphic variant of uuere which translates into the dynastic name Vere with the Latin V being interchangeable with the double U or hard Germanic W which became V - rendering Ver or Were. This is pronounced as a soft F, which we find in the Norse Yfari and the old English Uffara or Yffera.

The Turkish, or properly Galatian word Uber, meaning ’witch’ therefore linguistically corresponds to the foregoing variations found in Gothic, German, Dutch, Norse English, Greek, Latin and Sanskrit, where finally, as Upari, we discover that originally Uber - Vampire - meant Overlord. In the following paragraphs we shall investigate the cultural background behind the word ’witch’ as uber, and discover that what holds true linguistically is supported by cultural and social evidence.

Contextually, when applied to an individual as a ’witch’, the word uber would suggest that the person referred to was in some way ’over’ or ’above’ others, as in the German ubermensch or uberherren. The Germanic languages, as with the others sampled here, are all Indo-European and the Sanskrit in particular, being of Aryan or Scythian origin is closest to the Galatian, and we shall see that the argument for overlordship is exactly the case.

From a cultural standpoint, we read the word ’witch’ and with it comes a large trolley of baggage that we have inherited from the popularly reinforced understanding of the word, influenced heavily by fairy stories and biased histories told from a protagonistic point of view. Today the specifically Saxon word ’witch’ tends to conjure up images of old hags prancing about on dark, spooky moors and cackling into cauldrons.

Witch is derived from the Saxon root word wicce (feminine) or wicca (masculine) and the Saxons used it to describe a class of persons whom they thought were inhabited by an intelligence or spirit - a daemon or genii - usually evil, because the Saxons took up catholicism pretty early on in their careers and were consequently biased.

Conversely, some people today would like us to believe, however, that ’witch’ meant a "wise one" and say that witchcraft, or in Saxon - wiccecraeft as they like to call it - means craft of the wise, failing completely to realize that the word wise in Saxon is wita, not wicca or wicce.

Wicca is actually related to both ’wicker’ and ’Viking’ or Wiking as the Norse would pronounce it. In Russia the word Vikhr meaning whirlwind, is a title of the Zmei Dragons, sons and daughters of Zmei-Tiamat. This confirms that the link between Sumaire, Zmei or Zumei and Sumeria was also known in Russia, once a Viking province.

It also demonstrates that the Danish Vikings, witch lords, were sons of the Dragon and the Scandinavian Tuadha d’Anu. In Ireland the Zmei Lord or Vikhr is known as the Dark King - the Whirlwind, meaning he was sumaire or vampire and via Uber, a Witch Lord or Wicca. As the Willow (wicker) bends and yields to the whirlwind so the witch (wicca) yields to the Sumaire, the ancient vampire legacy within him or her, a legacy that is awoken during the Mass of the Phoenix, when the primordial ancestors rise from the dead to take possession of the witch’s soul!

Wicca, derived from the same Saxon word as Willow, means to "bend or yield" ones spirit to that of a daemon (Greek, meaning praeter human intelligence or inspiration), giving the christian idea of possession, though erroneously. The witch was indeed possessed by a daemon and that daemon was certainly praeter-human and not of this world.

Any spirit, including the archangels, conjured by the witch or magician (the distinction, like that between pagan and christian, is fallacious), as in ceremonial magic, was actually the ancestor (antecessor) of the witch her or himself. It was a denizen of the ancient dragon itself - but it was carried in the witch’s blood which, the purer it was through unbroken descent from the Dragons, the stronger would be the return of the ancestors within. The Stronger the blood the stronger the invocation and the more complete the possession. With Mixed blood there was weak inspiration and little discernible presence. "The Blood is the Life".

The witch was possessed by this daemon, because the witch by descent and heredity was that daemon itself. It was his or her genetic inheritance and part of his or her racial consciousness, and to that the witch would yield, when occasion necessitated, placing the witch and the words wicce or wicca firmly in the tradition of the trance seer (derkesthai), a practice rooted in Scythian shamanic culture.

This is confirmed in the word genius, meaning inborn intellect or inspiration. Closely related to this word is genie, meaning a spirit, as in genius loci - ’a spirit of place’. In Arabic the jinni is a spirit of fire or inspiration. The Latin genius, in Greek, is a daemon or inspiring intelligence and the root Latin gens signifies birth, origin and especially blood. The daemon or genius of the Dragons was inherited through the blood. Witches are born, not made by silly playacting initiation rituals.

A seer in Gaelic was called a Merlin and in the tripartite Aryan-Scythian caste system which overlaid that of their clients, the deeply religious Celts, the Merlin was a Druid Prince. Either side of the Druidic caste were the castes of the warrior aristocrats and the craftsmen and although they all tended to behave as equals in this king tribe system, the druids were senior in rank.

Each caste attended to their allotted tasks and the study, teaching and practice of shamanism and magic were strictly the province of the Druids and Druidesses, forming part of a vast storehouse of knowledge and experience in the crafts and sciences, and in statesmanship and lore.

The Druids were responsible for bringing into being gods for the Celts to worship and though they themselves were not religious, scholars agree that Druidism was the "religion" of the Celtic world. So we can see that although the Celts had their own caste system with their own burgh kings or chieftains, above them were the Scythian kings, and above the Scythian kings were the Elven Druids, the Priest Kings who stood above all others, the ultimate Overlords of Eurasia.

In the Scandinavian countries the craft or ability to gain wisdom or power (Sanskrit - Siddhi) by yielding to daemons or intelligences (ancestral god spirits which were part of the practitioners’ own genetic inheritance and make-up) through trance or dream states was considered to be shamanic and was called Siddir, whilst those who practiced this art were themselves called Siddirs. The Siddir knotted together the web of dreams and loosened those knots to release power and knowledge.

In other words they brought together and spoke or gesticulated a series of mnemonics that would trigger off precontrived, imprinted states of consciousness that acted as doorways into deeper seats of consciousness. In Gaelic Scythian this ability and the name corresponding to it was called the Sidhe, a term used to describe and name the Irish fairies, the Tuadha d’Anu or Tuatha de Danaan as they were later called, a race of priest kings or druid princes.

The Web of Dreams relates to both the witches’ knotted ball and the Web of Wyrd or Fate (fata-fairy) and in the Scythian and Celtic cosmology, the power associated with it was thought to reside in the Otherworld, the realm of the gods (druidic ancestors) which was entered via trance or dream states, achieved whilst the druid or druidess occupied the fairy hills, the mortuary raths where the forefathers were buried.

The witch, as a seer or Merlin in Scythian culture and society, consequently belonged to an exclusive genome within a distinct holy and royal caste of overlords, which is reflected in the Gaelic word for a witch - Druidhe - which is pronounced Drui and is related to Draoi and Dracoi, meaning a dragon. Drui itself means Man (or Woman) of the Tree (not men of the oaks, as some have suggested) and is also related to the Sanskrit dru, meaning to run. This is associated with the ritual of running the labyrinth, with which we will deal in due course.

Therefore in Galatia, which had its own druids and was the site of the Nemeton, the largest regular gathering of druids in Europe, the term for a witch was Uber meaning Overlord, whilst in the Gaelic west the term for a witch was Druidhe which meant the same as Uber - An Overlord.

In summary vampire in its earlier form - oupire - derives ultimately from the Galatian Uber, which itself is derived from the Aryan Upari and linguistically and contextually the Vampire - the witch or druid - was a Scythian High Queen or King: an Overlord.

It is interesting to note in this context that when he compiled his journals in the 17th century Calmet, who had traveled extensively throughout the Austrian empire as an official vampire investigator accompanying imperial officers and soldiers, wrote that he had found no evidence whatsoever to support any notion that vampirism was either a supernatural phenomenon committed by praeter-natural beings - which he utterly refutes - or that it ever occurred in any form, either as a cult or in any isolated incidents, amongst the lower strata of society.

Without exception the enlightened Abbé was able to discover perfectly ordinary explanations for the incidents he had investigated, which in his day was quite remarkable, as the Church in past times had actively promoted vampire paranoia.

As Professor Margaret Murray discovered herself, vampirism was not the prerogative of the merchant or peasant classes, but was a cultic observance confined to the environs of the nobility, often as an adjunct to rites of the Noble and Royal Witch Covens of Scotland.

We can say with confidence then that real vampirism was indulged in by living beings who, unerringly, were members of the pre-christian and anti-christian high nobility and royalty. The most famous vampire stories, those of Dracula, Bathory and de Rais, support this conclusion. The historical evidence therefore supports the etymological origin of the word ’vampire’ - An Overlord.

Vampirism, up until the early 1700’s, by which time it had been in decline for several centuries, was not merely or solely the practice of a few isolated, high-born opportunists seeking some form of personal advantage or satisfying private perversions. Vampirism took two forms and the bloodline descendants of the ancient vampire lords had, in Britain, set the practice within an overall, multi-faceted social and cultural framework, stemming from the Iron-Age, that never gets an airing in the Gothic novel.

Vampires weren’t just vampires, as the penny dreadful would have us believe, they were individuals and families who used the practice to achieve specific aims and thereby fulfill those specific social obligations which, since the Scythian-Celtic period of the High Dragon Kings, were equated with their rank and position as leaders and overseers.

The Scythians
Throughout this discourse it must be borne in mind that when we speak of the Scythians as ’fairies’, ’dragons’, ’vampires’ or ’elves’, we are not talking about either the client races of the Scythians, or the ordinary Scythian citizenry, but of ’Royal Scythians’.

As we have discovered, the vampire - as a "witch" - belonged by genetic inheritance, to a distinct royal caste in Scythian-Celtic society, that of the priest-king or priestess-queen, the prince and princess-druids who had evolved very early on in human social history and who belonged to a Eurasian-wide hereditary priestly community which had originated with the Scythian-Aryans. The name Scythian was originally spelt Sithian in 16th century England, and it is from this tribal name that we obtain the word scythe, denoting a curved bladed agricultural tool, so named because of its similarity in shape to the Scythian sword.

The Scythians weren’t however named after their use of a curved sword. The name Sithian is related to a group of words that appear in Indo-European languages which are found as far apart as Eire and Northern India, indicating that they had a common Aryan origin in Scythia. These include - Sithia, Sidhe, Siddir and Siddhi.

In Cymric ’dd’ is pronounced ’th’, whilst in Irish and Scots the ’th’ is spelt dialectically ’dh’ whilst the ’s’ beginning a word is pronounced ’sh’. As we have related, the Siddir in Danish society were witches who practiced the art of knot tying and loosening.

These Siddir were directly related to the mythic Norns, the Mori or Fates who were said to be responsible for the fate of mankind by the patterns that they wove in the way that they tied and loosened the knots of the Web of Wyrd. The Siddirs, as well as being seers, could control such power as to influence the outcome of human affairs and in this respect their name reflects their abilities which, in India, were called the Siddhis, a word used to describe the powers of the Yogi who had self-realized.

The curious Irish word - Sidhe - pronounced ’shee’, ’sheeth’ or ’sheeth-ay’, attributed to the fairies and meaning ’powers’, is therefore identical to Siddir (sheeth-eer) and Siddhi (sheeth-ee) and is derived therefore, from the people of the powers - the Scythians or Sidheans (sheethee-ans). In Scotland the royal fairies were called the Seelie or Sheelie and their princesses were related to the sculpted Sheelagh Na Gigs over church doorways, who do NOT depict ancient goddesses of fertility, but were the royal Grail Maidens of the Elven kings and queens.

The Sheelagh na Gigs were goddesses of sovereignty and transcendence, and their place over the doorways of churches, many of which were built on the sites of ancient sacred groves, indicated that in entering these buildings one was entering through the vulva of the maiden into the otherworld, the realm of Elphame and the Kingdom of Heaven.

They were permitted above church doorways because the early church itself wanted to be identified with the old ways, firstly because it was in fact, at least in the beginning, part of the old ways and later, when catholicism took over, the Sheelaghs remained in place - in order to attract and convert "pagans".

Along with the Irish Sidhe, the Seelie and the Seelie Court of Scotland had a distinctly royal origin in the Tuadha d’Anu who when asked, like their Pictish descendants in Scotland, said of themselves that they were Scythian, as Canon Beck himself has insisted.

Some people tend to think that the word sidhe means a hill and therefore that the Irish Danaan, as the Sidhe, inherited this name as a consequence of fleeing into the hills after their defeat by the Milesians. As we can see this is not so and the fairy "hills", where the Aes Dan or Danaan, the gods of the Irish, were said to live, weren’t all Sidhe hills.

These - the power hills - were the sacred temple-mortuary raths and barrows, the creachaires or tomb-sepulchers, that the Danaan priest-kings were wont to ritually occupy for millennia before moving to Eire, and centuries before their Iberian kinsmen, the Milesians, came looking for a fight. The Sidhe, the Fairies, were the ’controllers of the fate of mankind’ and so named in remembrance of, and in identification with, their ancient Anunnaki (Anunnagi) ancestors.

In pre-christian history, although some practiced agriculture for a while, according to Murray-Hall M.A. they abandoned it for their traditional way of life and many of the Scythian clans remained solitary and insular nomadic pastoralists - horse lords who ranged across large tracts of Europe and Asia for centuries. Others opted late for a more settled existence and mixed settled agriculture with pastorialism, a system that can be found in both Takla Makan, where they built fine cities, and in Ireland, where they became know as the trooping fairies.

In general they were usually tall, pale skinned, with golden red hair and green eyes, unlike the Celts, who were stocky and squat, with ruddy complexions and dark hair, and practiced settled agriculture from a very early period.

The recent and rather unfortunate propagandist depiction of the Aryan (Scythian) as a tall, ruddy complexioned blonde racist yeoman-farmer-warrior-god has no basis in truth. In pre-christian history an Aryan was a High King, a warrior was a warrior and a farmer was a farmer and ne’er the three e’er met. The real Aryans of fact were red haired and green eyed, their hired military help, derived from their lower Ksatriya caste who were not Aryan were, sometimes, blonde and blue eyed.

The Aryan royal families didn’t intermarry with other tribes or castes but, with the development by many of their clans of settled city-states such as Scythopolis (30 AD, on the banks of the River Jordan just south of Galilee) nevertheless they became urban multi-racialists and appreciated cultural diversity.

The Aryan Hittites in particular were close allies of the Jews whose Draconian royal family, the House of David, made the Israelites, in a cultural sense, an early Aryan nation, and the Scythians and the Aryan Scythian Gaels had numerous settlements either in or adjacent to Israel and Judea.

The comparatively early use of the horse and of horse related technology separated the Aryans from the other tribes that occupied the middle-east and Eurasia. In Mittani, Mesopotamia, Akkad and Anatolia the Hurrians (whom in the 1920’s B. Hrozny described as the earliest Hindus) were the absolute Overlords and their supremacy is credited to their early use, like the Kurgans, of horse-drawn chariots.

The Hur syllable in Hurrian has been asserted by scholars, including G. Contenau (’La Civilisation des Hittites et des Hurrites de Mittani’) to be Har or Ar, meaning that the Hurrians, like the Scythians were Aryans with an Aryan Vedic royal-sacral family of gods.

These they bestowed upon the Hittites whose culture they dominated, (as the Hurrian or Aryan Mittani did in Mesopotamia) and the Hittites, in turn, provided the Greeks with these red-gold haired gods, including Zeus or Dyas Pater - the Jewish Jehovah, whose ancient symbol, shared with the sacred dynasty as a whole was - ironically - the swastika.

The early "Scythians", the people of the powers, occupied a region spanning The Balkans, Transylvania, Carpathia, the Ukraine and later, Siberia and Takla Makan where the Tocharians, as the Elves were mistakenly called by early linguists, spoke a ritual language which is now called Tocharian A but which originated in Thrace in 1800 BC and thus had connections with the Fir Bolg and consequently with the Tuadha d’Anu as a whole, who began migrating from Central Europe to Ireland at that period.

Over the centuries, from 5000 BC onwards, the Scythians had also migrated into the middle-east and had provided ruling families for many tribes and nations along and beyond the eastern Mediterranean coast.

In the ’Annals of Irish History’ the Scythian ’Tuadha d’Anu’ who had migrated farther still, to the islands of the north, were described as a tribe of deific queens, kings, princes and lords and were noted for having druids of their own. In Japan’s North islands there lives a shamanic tribe called the Ainu whose early writing style has been identified as being Gaelic Ogham!

As a noble tribe, a sect of the Aryan peoples who, during various migrations, had also wandered east several centuries before the d’Anu displacement and their reputed first journey to Eire in 1500 BC, the Aryan-Scythian horse lords, traveling south-east via Persia (Iran) from 1800 BC onwards, had entered the Indus Valley and intermingled with the Dravidian population.

This migration was to lands already formerly under Sumerian and consequently Ubaid control. The westward migration of the Scythians or Sidheans also included these very same Dravidians who, so British traditions state, were the messengers and summoners or ’fetches’ of the Merlins.

These curious and delightful beings were also known as brownies, for obvious reasons and adopted the habit of body tattooing in emulation of their Scythian lords, who in Britain and Ireland were known as the Pixies, which is a name derived from Pict-Sidhes or painted fairies.

The confusion which arises when the Picts are described as being short and brown may be clarified when we remember that the Scythian Caste System consisted of three closely interknit, co-operating races, whose traditions and practices would inevitably become, to a certain extent, common to all within the system by a natural process of social osmosis.

From this encounter arose the eastern branch of the Aryan, Vedic "Hindu" religion, with its druids or magi - the Brahmins - and a pantheon of gods who were virtually identical with the Sumerian, the Egyptian, the Hittite, The Irish, the Gaulish, the Danish and the Greek, all of which stem from this early family of Elven goddess-queens and god-kings whose first home was to be found in The Balkans, Transylvania, Carpathia and the Caucasus regions of Greater and Little Scythia.

Within the Brahmin caste special Tantric rites were and still are studied and practised. Evidence suggests that these ancient rites were brought to India from Sumeria. This accords with the assertion that Qabalah itself originated there also and the author has long maintained that Tantra, particularly the Kaula Vama Marg and Esoteric Qabalism are simply variations of each other. The Tree of Life symbol and its hidden meanings appears in Druidism and given the evidence to date, we can confidently say that Tantra and Qabalah are descended from ancient Ubaid Druidic philosophy.

The right hand path version of Hindu and Buddhist Tantra concerns itself with studying and practicing sexual rites that one might find associated with the Kama Sutra. This form of Tantra promotes penetrative intercourse as a method of changing consciousness and has attached to it various commentaries on right-living and right-thinking. This was thought by some Indian scholars to have originated with those who were depicted by one Indian scholar as the animistically minded, sex mad weasels, the Dravidians. The left hand path however is somewhat different.

This discipline can be found in both Hinduism and Buddhism and concerns itself with the practice of vampirism. This alone is sufficient evidence to allow one to ascertain that the ’Black’ or Left Hand or Kaula Path preceded the later right hand path which, though joyously tactile and self indulgent to begin with, appears many centuries later to have been somewhat sanitized for public consumption. The yogic disciplines associated with the Kaula Path, originating with the Scythians, are intended to lead the practitioner to what one might call ’union with godhead’.

This psychological condition is manifest in mystical christianity as being the perception by the devotee of ’the kingdom of heaven’. That few christians ever achieve such a state is not to be wondered at, as christianity is also a royal blood tradition, exactly like its brother and sister, Druidism and Witchcraft.

Many christians haven’t got a clue about this aspect of Jesus’ teaching and are in any case not encouraged to explore its possibilities because such union leads to physical and psychological freedom, the very last thing that the established churches wish to encourage in the masses, even though Jesus himself preached it.

Union with Godhead, dwelling in Elphame, realization of the Buddha or whatever one likes to call it is accompanied by a range of powers which were catalogued by the amazing Edwardian lady explorer Alexandra David Niel, who witnessed the performance of these remarkable powers or Siddhis by Buddhist monks in Nepal and Tibet, whose ritual and philosophy owed much to the indigenous religion Bon-Po which ethically followed the same path as Kaula Vama Marg.

In the west we call it magic but, as we have seen, it was also known as the Sidhe. Kaula Tantra is dedicated to the Goddess Kali who is associated with both creation and destruction in the Hindu pantheon. Kali is a lunar deity who, like Tantra itself, moved east from Sumeria. As a moon goddess she is associated particularly with moon blood and the essences of the female organs of generation.

So what can we say of the nascence of Vampirism so far? Principally that it originated, not surprisingly, in Transylvania and the Central Eurasian region known as Scythia and that its practitioners were of a distinct race, the Elves, the high goddess-queens and god-kings of the Arya or Aesir.

Vampirism was the central feature of a philosophy based on endocrinology, rather than occult mumbo-jumbo and used the consumption of female blood and mumae to enhance awareness and lead the practitioner to union with godhead.

The powers accompanying such an elevated state of consciousness were called the sidhe or siddhi and were, with vampirism, the foundation of the cults of Druidism, Tantric Kaula Yoga, Qabalism, Alchemy, Rosicrucianism and Witchcraft.

Kali, like all the Ubaid Deities was a flesh and blood being. She, Kalimaath or Kali Marg, was a daughter of Lilith and Samael, son of Anu, who appears in the Aryan pantheon as Ahura Mazda and in Iran as the Medean god Zoroaster. Anu himself was the god who gave his name to the Tuatha de Danaan and as Sitchin has suggested the definition of the word god itself is ’descended of Anu’.

Based on the spelling ’Tuatha de Danaan’, some have suggested that these Irish elven folk derived their name from an Irish mother goddess named Dana. If they had checked the earlier spelling - Tuadha d’Anu (Tribe of Anu) - they would have discovered that the Scythian Sidhe were the sons and daughters of Anu and the Ubaid gods and goddesses.

To recap then we have a clear connection between the words siddhi and sidhe both of which originate from a Scythian or earlier proto-Aryan-Ubaid root. The Scythians, as the Aryans of Persia and Asia provided the people then with their religious and social structures and mores and spread their wisdom and overlordship, mostly by invitation from prospective client tribes, throughout Britain and Europe.

The Scythian Aryans, as the ’Danaan’ settled in Eire and Scotland whilst in Wales they were known as the House of Don (Dan) or the House of Gwynnedd. This house sired the line of Llewelyn Princes, whilst in Scandinavia the Danaan became the Danes or Vikings and produced a junior cousin line - the Svei or Swedes - from which descended the Ruotsi clan who founded Russia. In Denmark the Sidhe was present as the Siddir, a class of seer or witch who were later separated from the Godthi or Gothi, the Danish Druids.

The Scythian Danaan in Eire, as in the rest of Europe, were a race apart, a ruling caste within which, like the original race of the Gods from whom they descended, there were further caste classifications.

In Denmark these were later named the Jarl, Carl and Thrall castes whilst in Eire they were broadly speaking the Druids, the Kings and the Warrior Smiths. In India they are still defined as the Brahmins, the Ksatriyas and the Sudras.

The original castes of the Gods were:
a) the common gods - gods of Earth
b) the gods of Heaven and Earth
c) the gods of Heaven
The first class were what we might call jobbing gods who became the genii locus or pagan spirits. The second class - the gods of Heaven and Earth - were the Titans, the Repha’im and Morrighans, the Angels and Valkyries who interceded between the transcended gods, the divine ancestors - the gods of Heaven - and man.

Heaven was the otherworld, not a place up in the stars, but a state of being which was adjacent to our own dimension - called sometimes the mirror-world, most competently described, more than once, in the Mabinogion - which could be freely entered and left by the gods of Heaven and Earth, the Portal Guardians. In this place, also known as Elphame, Hades, Hel, Caer Glas and Tir Na n’og there dwelt the essences of the previous gods of Heaven and Earth who had passed on to become the transcended ones, the ’antecessors’ or ancestors of the later witches.

By dwelling in tombs the gods of Heaven and Earth, the Danaan Queens and Kings, made contact with their ancestor Gods and passed their wisdom and edicts on to mankind. Today we might call this process invocation.

These gods are carried in the blood and by invocation, we bring their qualities and identities to the forefront of conscious being and give them voice. These druidic gods and goddesses of Heaven and Earth were effectively the highest overlords on Earth, the elven rulers of the human kings and queens who ruled beneath them.

Often we find mention of the fairy blood in the medieval era in connection with the ruling nobility of the time. We might then be tempted to come to the logical conclusion that all nobility and royalty was thus of Fairy origin. However this is simply not the case. Despite the usurpation of the original fairy families by the church sponsored new nobility, the previous kingly and noble dynasties were essentially human anyway.

The fairy blood at that time, the dark ages and the medieval period, was carried by the descendants of the Archdruidic dynasties who formerly ruled over the contemporary Celtic and Eurasian kings and lords, it was not carried by any or all of the royal or noble families of the time simply because they were the heads of their castes, because over such class distinctions were positioned additionally, the castes of the elven god-kings themselves.

The gods of Heaven and Earth - the Archdruidic caste - dwelt in Barrows and Bergs which in Eire were called Raths, meaning a ’royal seat’. These Raths were the holy shrines and sepulchres built by the Danaan - the original Gods of Ireland according to the ’Annals of Irish History’ - to house the mortal remains of their ancestors and act as royal palaces for the Portal Guardians. In specific cases these Gods are named, and we learn, for instance, that Newgrange was the shrine occupied by Nuadha and later Oengus.

The devotional and holy nature of these places has led some scholars and commentators to believe that, because they were tombs and temples, then those said to occupy them must be purely spiritual entities, gods of an ethereal nature. Originally nothing could have been farther from the truth. Both Nuadha and Oengus were kings of the Danaan and contemporary descriptions of them and their kin leave us with the picture of the Danaan as a race of people with prodigious and very earthly appetites.

From their kinsmen in Siberia we know that, by our dubious standards, they were complete junkies and imbibed any form of drug they could get hold of. These would have included cannabis and cocaine, prevalent in Egypt and the Levant at the time, as well as the drugs classically associated with the druids and the elves such as Amanita Muscaria and Psylocybin, the fairy mushrooms of children’s picture books everywhere.

The Danaan were hardened drinkers and unscrupulous womanizers, whilst accounts of their princesses relate that they often mated in public with the highest nobles of their clan, to prove or reiterate their social standing to onlookers. (Heroditus: The Histories).

Counterbalancing this view of them, born of our own hypocritical conditioning, the Danaan, whether in Eire or mainland Europe or Asia, were the finest smiths, jewellers, poets and musicians of their time, they were the Lords of fearless warriors and gifted horsemen and, despite what we might think of the foregoing, they were a righteous, meticulous people who maintained standards of conduct in areas of their social life where such standards were considered essential for the harmonious order of society.

Great emphasis was laid upon honesty and truth in one’s words and one’s dealings, the maintenance and conservation of the natural environment was paramount, and infractions, such as the cutting of trees, could mean death. Emphasis was also laid on hospitality and courtly behavior to one’s peers or guests, the honoring of one’s ancestors and heroes, and the maintenance of extended family ties through fostering.

They weren’t bothered about the petty morality we imbue our sexual behavior with but would kill a man for breaking his word or lying. They were an heroic people and, compared with us today, a far more moral race whose standards of conduct, not invested or centered on our kind of childish taboos - but placed where it matters - puts us to shame.

They were a race centered on their spirituality which itself was centered on gnosis and transcendent consciousness. This made them, like their later royal Viking cousins, a fearless people much loved and also much feared in turns, by all who knew them, whether in Eurasia or the British islands.

In about 500bc the Milesians entered Ireland from Iberia. Having defeated the Danaan tribes they put many of them to flight. It was during this period that the Danaan became known as the Daouine Sidhe - the people of the hills - an erroneous use of the word sidhe.

One group, the tribe of the Danaan king of Ulster, Bruidhne (mistakenly called Cruithne by the Romans), fled to Caledonia where they became known as the remnant of Cruithne or the ’Cruithainn’.

Other Danaan clans fled to Wales and the south west of mainland Britain. Several centuries later, when the Romans were unfortunate enough to encounter them in Scotland, they referred to these Danaan as ’Picts’ and it is this word that has adapted itself to become one of the names we use to describe the elven peoples - the pixies - or properly the Pict-Sidhes as we have already seen.

These being also came to be known as the Leprachauns and the etymology of this word, though thought to mean ’small-bodied’ actually means ’scaly-bodied’ from the Latin word lepra as in leprosy - scaly skinned.

The scaliness referred to was derived from the fish -scale style of armour which was common to the draconian Dacians, the Zmei, the Danes and the Danaan, all of whom originated in the region now known as Greater Scythia.

The scaly, twin-pronged tail of the wouivre or mermaid was also derived from the use, by grail maidens, of fish-scale plated leggings. When worn with the swan’s or raven’s feather cloaks, we have the classical image of the Harpie, reproduced in medieval depictions of Melusine.

Pict or Pictish means ’painted’ and the Danaan earned this appellation by virtue of their use of tattoos or woad to decorate their bodies with totemic or magical markings, the favorite being the labyrinth or spiral whorl.

The ancestors of the Irish Danaan - the Ubaid Danaan - had been using tattoos and woad since 4000 BC and examples of it can also be found in depictions of the Egyptian god Osiris or Asher as he is also known, and in the depictions of the Hindu gods Vishnu and Siva. Kali herself was also known as Kali Azura - the Blue Kali.

The spiral or whorl - the labyrinth - is the subject of a later essay in which it and its painted or carved symbol, lie at the centre of vampire and elven tradition. The spiral can be found carved into the rock at Newgrange in Ireland and also featured as a sacred design associated with the dwellings of the related Kassite Danaan clans who migrated to Britain.

In the Gaelic language we find two words specifically defining ’vampires’. The first - Creachaire - means a sepulchre, a tomb, a shrine and a temple, indicating that the character we later become familiar with as the "vampire" of Gothic legend was in fact a "dweller in the tombs", a druidic priest-king or priestess-queen - an Uber or Witch Overlord.

In Eurasia, particularly in the permafrost of Siberia and the arid wastes of Takla Makan in China, the mummified bodies of Scythian Chieftains and Shamankas or Priestess queens have been found. In Siberia the frozen remains of a male were unearthed. He had been tattooed with animal designs reminiscent of the totem Pictish salmon often found carved on stones in Scotland.

In the same region a shamanka had been unearthed who had been tattooed with the spiral labyrinth design. She, like her counterpart in Takla Makan, wore the conical headress of the Anunnaki gods of Sumeria that is also associated with medieval witchcraft. This same headress is depicted in bas-relief on the walls of the palace of Darius as being worn by those Scythians who brought him gifts in 500 BC.

The Takla Makan mummy, excavated by the Chinese in the 1960’s had red-gold hair and was buried adjacent to a cache of tartan plaid cloth and spiral painted pottery, similar to that found at Al’Ubaid in Syria. In the same region caves have been discovered where the walls are painted with devotional Buddhist pictures featuring the Tocharians, as they are known, conversing with Buddha.

Geoffrey Ashe states that the western Druids were interviewed by Buddha who claimed that they, the Druids, had established Shangri-La in the west. This should give the reader some hint as to the general thrust of druidic philosophy and of the hidden nature of that promoted by Jesus, whom St Columbus clearly stated was also a druid and magus himself."


http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/dragons/esp_sociopol_dragoncourt02_01.htm




•  REPLY  •


Seshat
Seshat
Chimera (90)
Posts: 135
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Chateau Orleans (Coven) is a member of an Alliance

Member of Chateau Orleans (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
00:55:37 Sep 25 2012
Read 3,613 times

There are no references to "vampires" in the bible. All books, including the bible, are open to interpretation. A lot of the posters in this thread seem to flaunt their interpretation as fact. Interpretation is hardly equivalent to evidence.



•  REPLY  •


Doru
Doru
Premiere Sire (128)
Posts: 1,197
Honor: 387
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 18 years.
01:55:17 Sep 25 2012
Read 3,605 times

John 6:56
He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.



•  REPLY  •


Doru
Doru
Premiere Sire (128)
Posts: 1,197
Honor: 387
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 18 years.
02:00:17 Sep 25 2012
Read 3,604 times

Book of Enoch,Chapter 7

1 And all the others together with them took unto themselves wives, and each chose for himself one,
and they began to go in unto them and to defile themselves with them, and they taught them charms

2 and enchantments, and the cutting of roots, and made them acquainted with plants. And they
3 became pregnant, and they bare great giants, whose height was three thousand ells: Who consumed
4 all the acquisitions of men. And when men could no longer sustain them, the giants turned against
5 them and devoured mankind. And they began to sin against birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and
6 fish, and to devour one another's flesh, and drink the blood. Then the earth laid accusation against the lawless ones.



•  REPLY  •


Seshat
Seshat
Chimera (90)
Posts: 135
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Chateau Orleans (Coven) is a member of an Alliance

Member of Chateau Orleans (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
02:30:53 Sep 25 2012
Read 3,602 times

Transubstantiation can hardly be equated with the literal drinking of blood and eating of flesh.

In no way does The Book of Enoch offer "proof" of vampires in the bible. You have simply interpreted the words in a such a manner.

By the way, The Book of Enoch is a non-canonical text...it is not even in the Bible. So whether your interpretation of The Book of Enoch is correct or not...it is irrelevant to the original question posted.



•  REPLY  •


Doru
Doru
Premiere Sire (128)
Posts: 1,197
Honor: 387
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 18 years.
23:46:52 Sep 25 2012
Read 3,580 times

The Book of Enoch is in the bible, just not your bible.

Vampires are not those of Hollywood, but are of magic ceremonies, in which, blood is consummed to enhance the powers performing magic. King Solomon of the bible performed magic.

“Happy is the man that finds wisdom, and the man that gets understanding. For the merchandise of it is better than the merchandise of silver, and the gain thereof than fine gold. She is more precious than rubies: and all the things the I can desire are not to be compared unto her. Length of days is in her right hand; and in her left hand riches and honor. Her ways are ways of pleasantness, and all her paths are peace. She is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her: and happy is every one that retains her.”



•  REPLY  •


Seshat
Seshat
Chimera (90)
Posts: 135
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Chateau Orleans (Coven) is a member of an Alliance

Member of Chateau Orleans (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
00:57:03 Sep 26 2012
Read 3,577 times

"...just not your bible"

The last time I checked the only bible it was in was in was the Ethiopian Orthodox Church. I'm sorry, I had no idea you were a member.

I in no way intended to insult the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.

You guys should all write your own Gospels. You could like chuck in any information you wanted. I say go for it! Dude, how can she disagree with what I have to say? Doesn't she know who I am? I have my own freaking Gospel!.

Nothing I posted spoke about my personal religious beliefs. With the "...your bible" comment, you seem to be suggesting that you do. Just because I am of the belief that there are no "vampires" in either the new, or old testament... or any any "book", sea scroll, or dried up piece of parchment you can throw at me...does not mean that I am necessarily a Christian; which I am assuming was what you meant to imply with your comment.

I could be a Christian...I could be a card carrying Satanist with a keen interest in theology...I could be like some grand poobah occultist...I could also just be using VR as my downtime between intense games of Dungeons and Dragons.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
19:00:22 Sep 26 2012
Read 3,555 times

(Doru: hehehe... sorry, but it is somewhat humorous to see others, such as you now, having to also try and reason with those whose historical and "scriptural" education and understandings are limited to only what they might have picked up along the way or been told by religious leaders. Frustrating as hell, isn't it?)

Whether a historical text is useful or historically accurate or religiously legitimate a next to nothing to do with whether or not 3-5th Century CE "Church Gathets" (overseen by Roman Emperors) thought was canonical or not.

And as specifically regards the Book if Enoch... it was considered religiously significant and legitimate enough to be quoted in the New Testament (Book of Jude)...and it's imagery referred to in other New Testament references...including words found therein attributed to Jesus, himself.

Now...as all know...my own research discredits the Book of Enoch as a legitimate source for historically accurate information regarding the "Fallen Angels" and their descendants





•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
19:03:55 Sep 26 2012
Read 3,554 times

... but that has nothing to do with whether the later Roman Church approved of it and everything to do with the enormous timespan separating the Book of Enoch from the events it purports to report.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
19:06:22 Sep 26 2012
Read 3,553 times

Re: previous post... "Church Gathets" = "Church Fathers" (damn swype!)



•  REPLY  •


Seshat
Seshat
Chimera (90)
Posts: 135
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Chateau Orleans (Coven) is a member of an Alliance

Member of Chateau Orleans (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
23:59:29 Sep 26 2012
Read 3,542 times

(Doru: hehehe... sorry, but it is somewhat humorous to see others, such as you now, having to also try and reason with those whose historical and "scriptural" education and understandings are limited to only what they might have picked up along the way or been told by religious leaders. Frustrating as hell, isn't it?)

Upir: ...limited only to what I have picked up along the way or have been told by religious leaders? Dude. That is kind of insulting. I prefer to think of myself as a reformist. I am quite able to read texts myself and come to my own conclusions.

The last time I checked a "counter-reformation" did not consist of copying and pasting, or para-phrasing information found on the internet.

Yes Upir, the Nephilim are mentioned in the New Testament. Doru: I just fail to see how a being with cannabalistic tendencies is necassarilly a vampire (in either a Hollywood, or "real" sense). I would appreciate any further information you would be willing to share with me on the subject. The Nephilim have always fascinated me.

My personal interpretation of biblical texts may be completely wrong. Unlike "the church" (Upir: note my use of the word the as apposed to my) I do not claim to be infallible.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
10:34:34 Sep 27 2012
Read 3,514 times

I was not intending to be insulting, Seshat. My point was that to discount or dismiss a Christian historical text just because it wasn't voted into the Biblical canon by a few Roman Emperors and/or early Church Fathers (all with their own axes to grind) does not in any way invalidate its contents. In fact, it might actually help legitimize such texts given the ulterior motives the early Church had for wishing to homogenize and orthodoxize its beliefs... regardless whether such had Thing One to do with historical accuracy.

I certainly do agree with you that there was nothing cannibalistic or, for that matter, bloodthirsty about the historical Vampire, either. Those called "Vampires" were nothing more ... or less ... than the Slavic name for those who were, in fact, surviving descendants of the Nephilim. In the Bible, they were referred to as the "Rephaim" and likewise slaughtered every time they were encountered by the truly bloodthirsty: Humans.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
10:48:51 Sep 27 2012
Read 3,511 times

... actually, allow me to rephrase that last sentence a bit.

Those who have always sought the lives of the descendants of the Nephilim ("Fallen Angels") are not the "Humans," in general... but specifically those Humans within the Abrahamic religions that are founded on patriarchy, misogyny and extreme anti-sex philosophies. For all such, the truly gylanic (gender-equal) and insatiably sensual Rephaim (Vampires) were anathema, the very embodiment of Evil, itself.

Hence... as in the Old Testament (as Rephaim and also the "Sons of Belial") and in the New Testament (read the Book of Jude)... these same descendants who were so revered and honored in Sumer and Egypt, have always been hunted down and slaughtered. Hence the reason why "Vampires" were never demonized and viewed as evil until only AFTER Christianity arrived in Central/Eastern Europe. Only with the proliferation there of Christianity did the false tales of blood-drinking begin, tales never heard of until that time.

So also with the Rephaim never being referred to anywhere in the Bible as bloodthirsty cannibalistic giants. No, not once. Only over 1500 years later, long after they had been slaughtered and driven from Palestine, do people begin writing texts claiming them to have been such. Only then were the Book of Jubilees and the Book of Enoch written for the first time calling them such.





•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
17:03:35 Sep 27 2012
Read 3,504 times

Doru -

Sorry I haven't had a chance yet to respond to your long excerpt. While the conclusions reached in the article are not well supported by the evidence (in my opinion), yet the premise is dead-on accurate:

As archaeology is finally beginning to verify (and that I have declared for decades now), original Sumerians (also and more accurately called Ubaidians), were the same race of people that constituted the earlier Carpathian and Central European culture being called the Vinca. They were the literal descendants of the Annuna (Sumerian), also called the ShemsuHor (Sons or Family of Horus), by the Egyptians, also known as the... BeneHaElohim (Sons of God), in the Bible (Genesis 6:1-4).

These were/are the descendants of the original Nephilim...those later falsely demonized as... Vampires.








•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
07:10:00 Sep 28 2012
Read 3,486 times


Mostly there is a concordance of opinions regarding the fact that Sumerians came from mountain areas. V. Zamarowski wrote in his famous book called "There was first, Sumer", "Their religion proclaimed that their gods lived on the mountain (peaks). Therefore, they built mountain shaped temples (ziggurats) in their new country because there were not any mountains, there". The Russian historian N. Jirinov, following this idea, declared in "Znanie Sila" magazine that Sumerians migrated from the Balkan Peninsula, taking their calendar with them. Yet, they changed it because it did not fit with the day and night length of their latitude. The Pole astronomer Ludwig Zaidler, used the same proof in his book called "The Clocks` History", in order to demonstrate the Sumerian migration from the Carpathians area. N. Jirov also outlined that the Sumerian language was totally different from that of their Semite neighbours and their writing established their ancestors` origins in a mountain country.

http://www.certitudinea.ro/articole/istorie/view/the-slates-of-tartaria-the-oldest-world-writing-discovered-in-romania


•  REPLY  •


Sorvena
Sorvena
Termagant (58)
Posts: 2,469
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Member of Legion (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 6 years.
03:55:16 Oct 02 2012
Read 3,456 times

I've never read anywhere that states there are vampires in the bible. People above make some very interesting arguments and I can see where vampirism can be mistaken according to scripture such as the drinking of blood and eating of flesh. This doesn't dictate being a vampire to me. I don't see how fallen angels would be considered vampires either. To me, a vampire needs the lifeforce, the energies that it lacks. Jesus never stated anywhere he lacked energy did he? Being risen from the dead doesn't equate vampire either. That would probably be defined zombie but only if a ritual was performed to bring him back and i don't recall that being in the writings either, unless i'm mistaken. So my answer would be no.



•  REPLY  •


Manic
Manic
Ferine (29)
Posts: 14
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Limbus Patrum (Coven) is a member of an Alliance

Member of Limbus Patrum (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 13 years.
11:50:35 Oct 06 2012
Read 3,406 times

In all honesty I've had a marvelous time reading through this... erm... 'debate'.

There were a few things I thought to say throughout but I've decided to just quickly hit on one area.

I can't seem to grasp where the idea of Cain being a demon is coming from? Growing up in the home I did, I've read through the Book a few times and in all translations I've come across it speaks of Cain being the son of Adam and his 'wife', Eve.
To be a demon would one not need to be the child of at least one demon? I may be off base, but it seems to me Cain was just an egotistical prick who got jealous because little bro's offering was more favoured by God. Call me crazy, but I don't see how that makes him a demon.

:)



•  REPLY  •


Sorvena
Sorvena
Termagant (58)
Posts: 2,469
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Member of Legion (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 6 years.
16:23:15 Oct 06 2012
Read 3,400 times

Well they feel since Cain committed an act of evil, then his soul has demonic ties i guess?

Anytime i hear of these stories in the bible, it doesn't sound like anything "divine" in nature. It sounds like your typical dysfunctional family that we see today. The "Heads" of the bible are more or less everybody's big daddy who is simply trying to guide the masses by setting up some rules, instilling basic morals and punishments for doing so.

You have to also take into account there are things tampered with, rewritten to fit one's society at the time, and WE evolve, the bible and religion itself, doesn't.

Most vampires I know personally have a draw towards the "darker" ones mentioned such as Lucifer (which ofc is his lighter self), and Lilith whom would be deemed Immortal because she was not cursed as humanity was by God, which i find to be terrible for a father to do to it's own creations...

So if we take a look at the characters that are immortal, those are the one's people factor in the "vampiric" catagory.

At least that is the perception i'm receiving by what is asked here.



•  REPLY  •


Manic
Manic
Ferine (29)
Posts: 14
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Limbus Patrum (Coven) is a member of an Alliance

Member of Limbus Patrum (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 13 years.
00:32:06 Oct 07 2012
Read 3,390 times

I see what you're saying and I won't disagree, though in my mind it doesn't make complete sense. If Cain killing his brother because of jealousy gives his soul 'demonic ties', then that would mean those who kill must all have them.... Which, if you're follow the stories in the bible, doesn't really make a lot of sense. For example, King David was one of God's beloved's, right? And did he not murder? (not saying murder isn't a demonic like action, just saying that other things are components.)

Maybe it's the cold medicine taking over, who knows lol



•  REPLY  •


Severus
Severus
Sire (107)
Posts: 517
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
07:00:24 Oct 07 2012
Read 3,375 times

Again, these misconceptions are a direct result of people not knowing what a real vampire is!!

Vampire have nothing to do with Satan or God, and as Upir pointed out the term didn't even exist before several hundred years ago.

It was during this period that Christianity hijacked the vampire lore and used it to spread their own doctrine. As various regions of the continent converted to Christianity, the vampire was viewed in different culture in different ways tailoring the legend to fit the society it was trying to convert.
The idea of a"dead person who retained a semblance of life and could leave its grave-much in the same way that Jesus had risen after his death and burial and appeared before his followers." is a play on immortality as viewed by Christians, has nothing to do with the true nature of immortality as real vampires know it.
In the Middle Ages, the Christian Church reinterpreted vampires from their previous folk existence into minions of Satan, and used an allegory to communicate another doctrine to Christians: "Just as a vampire takes a sinner's very spirit into itself by drinking his blood, so also can a righteous Christian by drinking Jesus's blood, one could take the divine spirit into himself."
The interpretation of vampires under the Christian Church and the established connotations that are still associated in the vampire genre today and are all stereo types.

If you want to know what a real vampire is try putting down the Bible and try taking to one instead.



•  REPLY  •


Sorvena
Sorvena
Termagant (58)
Posts: 2,469
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Member of Legion (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 6 years.
07:41:08 Oct 07 2012
Read 3,373 times

I talk to vampires.....quite frequently even. Nobody is saying they are taking the bible and the term "real vampire" too seriously here. It is about sharing our thoughts and ideas of where the legend of them COULD have started. For anyone to say they know everything is absurd. lol



•  REPLY  •


Severus
Severus
Sire (107)
Posts: 517
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
10:41:48 Oct 07 2012
Read 3,366 times

1) The Name:
When some one is over weight there can be many reasons why they got that way. It could be a physical problem, like a thyroid issue. It could be a physiological disorder or self esteem issue for which they medicated themselves with food... It could just be an addiction to food or poor life style choices.
Regardless the nature they will still be given the term Obese. The characteristics that make up vampirism can vary but the term we apply to them remains the same.

2.) The Bible:
Despite the fact that most of what people think of today as vampires is false, despite the fact the the term we apply to it today is not as old as the being itself, as noted above vampire is still a vampire. A being that lives and survives on the life force of others.
Adding in Demon traits, changing stories to fit our own interpretation and labeling who gave birth to what creatures, gives a religious attachment for which there is no historical foundation for. If we are to "share in ideas and thoughts" what is absurd is to indulge in wild unfounded speculation for the sake of entertaining ourselves. this only adds to the list of things that confuse an already muddy past. Facts are what we should be striving for not what if.
If you look at and weight the facts verses the falsehoods, the characteristic verses the terminology... there is no establishable link to vampirism within or outside of the Bible.

3.) So what??
There isn't any mention of dinosaurs in the Bible either, that doesn't mean there weren't any dinosaurs. We might as well start a conversation about what they called dinosaurs before 1900... at least none of them can get offended by what people type out of pure boredom.



•  REPLY  •


Doru
Doru
Premiere Sire (128)
Posts: 1,197
Honor: 387
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 18 years.
03:01:01 Oct 08 2012
Read 3,351 times

My point is divulged in the following statement:

"We can say with confidence then that real vampirism was indulged in by living beings who, unerringly, were members of the pre-christian and anti-christian high nobility and royalty. The most famous vampire stories, those of Dracula, Bathory and de Rais, support this conclusion. The historical evidence therefore supports the etymological origin of the word ’vampire’ - An Overlord."

And throughout history many text record this information, yet religious leaders and political leaders have distorted this information to the point that we have lost the truth because it serves their agendas.







•  REPLY  •


Severus
Severus
Sire (107)
Posts: 517
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
05:30:11 Oct 08 2012
Read 3,340 times

Doru,

We go back a while and as a friend I consider much of your knowledge and view points to be valid...and your personal history speaks for it's self. Like upir your opinion often carries weight with me but in this case I must disagree.

The idea that blood contains life force or energy is an Idea that has been around as long as recorded history. It is in every culture and every society has a ritual which reflect this... even in the United States there is a ritual tradition whereby hunters, upon their first kill consumes the deer's blood in order to absorb the animals spirit.

Dracula was a fictional character... for which the author (Bram Stoker) created from the template of real life personality, Vlad Tempest. A struggling warlord who's tactics may have been brutal, but they were hardly uncommon. Impaling heads or bodies was not new for the time he did them. The Romans were doing this very same ideological practice via crucifixion for centuries.
The fact that he consumed blood is not even special, the Mayans and countless other cultures around the world drank blood as part of ritual ceremony. This would also reign true for Countess Elizabeth Bathory who bathed in the blood of others because she felt it would keep her young. If it could be established that either of these individuals drank blood regularly for the purpose of consuming energy then one could make such a case for them being vampires. To my knowledge that evidence is not there and just because something sounds evil or demonic and involves blood doesn't mean it's Vampirism.



•  REPLY  •


IscariotSun
IscariotSun
Bloodsucker (50)
Posts: 53
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Limbus Patrum (Coven) is a member of an Alliance

Member of Limbus Patrum (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 16 years.
05:56:04 Oct 10 2012
Read 3,314 times

believe what you will the bible is a vampire.



•  REPLY  •


Doru
Doru
Premiere Sire (128)
Posts: 1,197
Honor: 387
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 18 years.
00:11:29 Oct 12 2012
Read 3,291 times

Through out history blood has been used to enhance magical ceremonies and this trend continues today. When "certain" blood is consummed, it enhances the invocations power of the person performing the invocation.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
21:25:08 Oct 12 2012
Read 3,276 times

Quick caveat here: Just as there is no evidence that Bathory actually got younger from bathing in blood, so also there is not one shred of evidence that using blood in any other practice results in any desired effect, either.

Belief does not equal evidence.



•  REPLY  •


malakh
malakh
Shaitan (64)
Posts: 264
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Wolves of Odin (Coven) is a member of an Alliance

Member of Wolves of Odin (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 18 years.
19:25:34 Nov 07 2012
Read 3,199 times

Hey hey.... hello there fellows of the night!

Yesterday I came across with one of my very first threads here in the VR, and was exactly this subject, which I am very into it.

This was the first post:

Vampires in the Bible?
Posted: 09:22:36 - Sep 29 2007
Times viewed: 616

Are there vampires in the bible?

Where did they appear and when? I know that myths were made about them, across the centuries, but that does not discredit that they exist in the most supernatural form that we know... as well as, is not it since anybody says that God does not exist that he stops existing or vice-versa, right? The beliefs of anyone do not credit or discredit an absolute truth, and believe me, not even all the truths are relative, like someone said it. People tend to discredit things that they don't understand, like vampires, God, Satan and even dragons, and so on... but the most supernatural book of all, the Bible, as answers to almost anything in that matter... the supernatural!

I will give just a little briefing on this, please express your opinion:

First:
the word, VAMPIRE
vam'-pir (alaqah): the Revised Version margin for "horseleach" (Prov 30:15) has "vampire."
See HORSELEACH
hors'-lech (`aluqah; compare Arabic `aluqah, "ghoul," and `alaqah, "leech," from root `aliq, "to cling"; Septuagint bdella, "leech"): The word occurs only once, in Prov 30:15, the Revised Version margin "vampire." In Arabic `alaqah is a leech of any kind, not only a horse-leech. The Arabic `aluqah, which, it may be noted, is almost identical with the Hebrew form, is a ghoul (Arabic ghul), an evil spirit which seeks to injure men and which preys upon the dead. The mythical vampire is similar to the ghoul. In zoology the name "vampire" is applied to a family of bats inhabiting tropical America, some, but not all, of which suck blood. In the passage cited the Arabic Bible has `aluqah, "ghoul." If leech is meant, there can be no good reason for specifying "horseleach." At least six species of leech are known in Palestine and Syria, and doubtless others exist. They are common in streams, pools, and fountains where animals drink. They enter the mouth, attach themselves to the interior of the mouth or pharynx, and are removed only with difficulty.

Second: the meaning of words and it's significance, take for example, the dinosaurs... do they appear in the bible?
let's see a word,
BEHEMOTH

be'-he-moth, be-he'-moth (behemoth: Job 40:15): Apparently the plural of behemah, "a beast," used of domestic or wild animals. The same form, behemoth, occurs in other passages, e.g. Dt 28:26; 32:24; Isa 18:6; Hab 2:17, where it is not rendered "behemoth" but "beasts." According to some, the word behemoth, occurring in Job 40:15, is not a Hebrew word, the plural of behemah, but a word of Egyptian origin signifying "water ox." This etymology is denied by Cheyne and others. The word has by various writers been understood to mean rhinoceros and elephant, but the description (Job 40:15-24) applies on the whole very well to the hippopotamus (Hippopotamus arnphibius) which inhabits the Nile and other rivers of Africa. Especially applicable are the references to its great size, its eating grass, the difficulty with which weapons penetrate its hide, and its frequenting of streams.
The remains of a fossil hippopotamus of apparently the same species are found over most of Europe, so that it may have inhabited Palestine in early historical times, although we have no record of it. There is a smaller living species in west Africa, and there are several other fossil species in Europe and India. The remains of Hippopotamus minutus have been found in enormous quantities in caves in Malta and Sicily.

But, is it really the word behemoth well translated to hippopotamus? Or a dinosaur better describes this word? See the passage in the bible:

Job 40:15 "Behold now, behemoth, which I made as well as thee; He eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, And his force is in the muscles of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: The sinews of his thighs are knit together.
18 His bones are [as] tubes of brass; His limbs are like bars of iron.
19 He is the chief of the ways of God: He [only] that made him giveth him his sword.
20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, Where all the beasts of the field do play.
21 He lieth under the lotus-trees, In the covert of the reed, and the fen.
22 The lotus-trees cover him with their shade; The willows of the brook compass him about.
23 Behold, if a river overflow, he trembleth not; He is confident, though a Jordan swell even to his mouth.
24 Shall any take him when he is on the watch, Or pierce through his nose with a snare?"

Hippopotamus have tail like a cedar? NO!

Ecclesiastes 1:13 "And I gave my heart to seek and search out by wisdom concerning all [things] that are done under heaven: this sore travail hath God given to the sons of man to be exercised therewith."

Concerning what? ALL THINGS.

http://www.internationalstandardbible.com/N/night-monster.html

LILITH
lil'-ith, li'-lith.

"The term "night-monster"' is a hypothetical translation of the Hebrew term lilith, used once only, in Isa 34:14. The word is translated in the King James Version "screech-owl," margin "night monster," the Revised Version (British and American) "night-monster," margin "Lilith." The term "night-monster" is also an interpretation, inasmuch as it implies that the Hebrew word is a Babylonian loan-word, and that the reference indicates a survival of primitive folklore."

"The Term Lilith:
One further fact with regard to lilith must be considered. The term occurs in a list of creatures, the greater part of which are matter-of-fact animals or birds. A comparative glance at a half-dozen translates of the passage Isa 34:11-14 will convince any reader that there are a great many obscure and difficult words to be found in the list. Following Delitzsch's translation we have: "pelican," "hedge-hog," "horned-owl," "raven," "wild-dog," "ostrich," "forest-demon" (se`ir), "night-monster." This is a curious mixture of real and imaginary creatures. Alexander acutely observes that there is too much or too little mythology in the passage. One of two conclusions would seem to follow from a list so constructed: Either all these creatures are looked upon as more or less demonic (see Whitehouse, Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (five volumes), article "Demon," with which compare West M. Alexander, Demonic Possession in the New Testament, 16), or, as seems to the present writer far more probable, none in the list is considered otherwise than as supposed literal inhabitants of the wilderness. The writer of Isa 34:14, who was not constructing a scientific treatise, but using his imagination, has constructed a list in which are combined real and imaginary creatures popularly supposed to inhabit unpeopled solitudes. There still remains a by no means untenable supposition that none of the terms necessarily are mythological in this particular passage.
Louis Matthews Sweet"

Isa 34:14 "And there shall the beasts of the desert meet with the jackals, and the wild goat shall cry to his fellow; the LILITH also shall settle there, and find for herself a place of rest."
BIBLE - Darby, John Nelson (1890)

Now, how about that? Lilith really appears in the bible and as nothing in common with a woman... its a night-monster/evil-spirit!

It's nice to be back... :)



•  REPLY  •


Cartomancer
Cartomancer
Arch Sire (194)
Posts: 1,252
Honor: 37,028
[ Give / Take ]
Cartomancer is the Hand of the Prince.
Vampire Rave member for 20 years.
20:45:25 Nov 09 2012
Read 3,157 times

One thing is for sure about the Bible- it's always being interpreted differently. I don't need to copy and paste excerpts of the Bible, Apocryphal texts, and those not even entered into Canon to say I wholly do not believe 'vampires' are in the Bible. I am a theologian with 6 formal years of university education in the field. I have my interpretation as well. I believe a totally literal understanding of the texts is always 100% scary. To read and understand those texts as 'exact'... well, you might as well be on board with all the other horrific things in the Bible we've worked so hard all these hundreds of years to explain better.

Without a good understanding of anicent Hebrew writing styles as well as the times and how they understood things without the knoweldge we have today- you're simply not going to have a great grasp of what you're reading.

As far as communion being equated to vampirism... you *cannot* tell a Catholic or other Christian what they 'really mean' and are doing if it isn't what they are doing. That's such a worn out analogy.

With the risk of offending people - I click, 'post'.



•  REPLY  •


malakh
malakh
Shaitan (64)
Posts: 264
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Wolves of Odin (Coven) is a member of an Alliance

Member of Wolves of Odin (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 18 years.
12:23:29 Nov 10 2012
Read 3,141 times

Hello there!

Well, if you had study that much and still think that the Bible was not inspired by God, I don't know what to tell you about that, 'cause faith is something that you cannot achieve with efforts or with a great mind. But, if you do believe that it was in fact inspired by God, then you must know that there are things that were revealed and things that were not. In the end it doesn't matter if there were vampires in the bible or not, or if they exist or not. What matters is what we're going to do with the scriptures.

Nice day to you all!!! //_^



•  REPLY  •


Oceanne
Oceanne
Noble Sire (160)
Posts: 4,490
Honor: 11
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 18 years.
17:02:53 Nov 10 2012
Read 3,134 times

I am no expert on the Bible,but I do remember something in..Ezekiel that always comes to mind when someone asks this question.I dont believe it has anything to do with vampires,but it does talk of drinking blood intil drunk with it.

17 ¶ And, thou son of man, thus saith the Lord GOD; Speak unto every feathered fowl, and to every beast of the field, Assemble yourselves, and come; gather yourselves on every side to my sacrifice that I do sacrifice for you, even a great sacrifice upon the mountains of Israel, that ye may eat flesh, and drink blood.

18 Ye shall eat the flesh of the mighty, and drink the blood of the princes of the earth, of rams, of lambs, and of goats, of bullocks, all of them fatlings of Bashan.

19 And ye shall eat fat till ye be full, and drink blood till ye be drunken, of my sacrifice which I have sacrificed for you.




•  REPLY  •


silentlord
silentlord
Malignant Spirit (49)
Posts: 564
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Wolves of Odin (Coven) is a member of an Alliance

Member of Wolves of Odin (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 13 years.
19:03:15 Nov 10 2012
Read 3,128 times

when you look at what jesus says he who drinks my blood abides in me.

does that mean christians are vampires of sorts?

or is it jesus who is the vampire?

also as in fiction vampires have to drink blood to stay youthful does that origin stem from the bible?

what are your thoughts people?



•  REPLY  •


xxJakynaxx
xxJakynaxx
Apparition (36)
Posts: 20
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Member of Legion (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 15 years.
06:56:13 Nov 11 2012
Read 3,112 times

I studied the bible for 17 years, (yeah I know creepy) under divers religious view, with some access to the archives and original (well not original but closest to the original as possible) from the Louvre I have also done research in some archeological librairy and with helps of students who were friends and for demons: no they were not vampires and yes they were in the bible according to the oldest documents they were angels who chose to leave God's side and wanted to become gods themselves and serve under the first angel who had left God to seek to be adore as god and serve.

When Cain killed Abel he was exiled and marked so no one would kill him by God.

Vampires are creatures of fictions orignating from many culture and beleifs, and some origines are from old wives tales and supertitious poeple.

That's my 2 cents, you beleive what you want, its fine either way, I am no one's judge or faith boss

ciao



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
19:11:16 Nov 12 2012
Read 3,083 times

Oceanne... in a word, "fascinating"!

Will have to look up that passage and study its meaning after first obtaining its context. What strikes me most is its reference to "Bashan," which place name has specific reference to the abode of the Rephaim at the time.

This passage appears to be a dire pronouncement of evil upon Israel given its prophecy of Israel becoming drunk on blood, which practice was expressly forbidden and considered abhorrent to God under Mosaic Law.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
19:36:32 Nov 12 2012
Read 3,079 times

Context is, indeed, everything. This passage, Oceanne, is found in Ezekiel 39 and refers to a feast the Lord gives to the birds and to predatory animals following Israel's slaughter of its enemies in Bashan. They (birds and animals) will become "drunk" on flesh and blood...not Humans (or "vampires").



•  REPLY  •


Oceanne
Oceanne
Noble Sire (160)
Posts: 4,490
Honor: 11
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 18 years.
20:10:19 Nov 12 2012
Read 3,075 times

Nice deduction Upir.:D I have another one for you..

John 6:53-60,66 Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
04:01:40 Nov 13 2012
Read 3,059 times

The topic of Jesus' blood as "drink" and his flesh as "bread" can be approached as either a vampiric metaphor or a literal example of Biblical vampirism. However, either way misses the far-deeper questions.

Jesus' alleged usage of blood/flesh as vampiric metaphor or literal vampiric ritual is moot to anyone with anything more than a passing understanding of Judaism and Jesus' teachings.

Rather than respond directly to this question, permit me to instead ask you (and anyone else) the following question:

Were drinking Jesus' blood (and eating his flesh) so critical to our supposed eternal salvation, why is it that only the further away we get from him chronologically (John's Gospel was the last of the canonical Gospels) do we find this ordinance's importance growing to such an extent?

In Mark's Gospel, the Last Supper is barely mentioned and no importance placed on it except as something Jesus did with his apostles on this one occasion. No mention is made by Jesus or the Gospel's author as this being intended as a saving ordinance or rite. And little more is found in either Matthew's or Luke's Gospels. Point being that it was not Jesus who commanded we symbolically drink his blood and eat his flesh ... but instead, those later claiming to be his followers. Hence the mootness of the issue as an example of supposed "vampirism."



•  REPLY  •


Severus
Severus
Sire (107)
Posts: 517
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
05:24:46 Nov 13 2012
Read 3,054 times

The excepted idea of that passage is one of good verses evil.
History is full of blood rituals, including The Bible .The primary Idea of Jesus's words where to warn that when you partake in the blood of others, bask in that which is forbidden you take into your being that which is evil... in opposition to that buy taking in the body and blood of your savior you take in that which is good and pure.
It's about symbolically taking in the word and teachings of God verses taking in that which will deliver you from Gods teachings.

This interpretation is the only reason 2 billion Catholics today drink wine and not actual physical blood.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
13:31:24 Nov 13 2012
Read 3,038 times

Were drinking Jesus' blood necessary for salvation, we would find this key teaching also in the earlier Gospels. That we do not and find such a teaching only later on...each time stronger than the time before... evidences that this was not one of Jesus' actual teachings.

Additionally, as drinking blood, symbolically or not, was absolutely abhorrent and expressly forbidden in Judaism, one must question whether Jesus...himself a devout and unabashed Jewish adherent, would have truly ever taught such a repugnant doctrine. The actual evidences strongly suggest he never did; this was, instead, a later teaching created by Paul, most likely.



•  REPLY  •


DragonMother
DragonMother
Sire (102)
Posts: 827
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 15 years.
13:42:45 Nov 13 2012
Read 3,035 times

What is required for salvation is found in Romans 10:9-10

"9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved."


There is no requirement of the communion (drinking blood/wine or eating flesh/bread) for salvation. Communion is done merely for remembrance of the sacrifice made by Christ.



•  REPLY  •


DragonMother
DragonMother
Sire (102)
Posts: 827
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 15 years.
13:46:18 Nov 13 2012
Read 3,032 times

Also might I add...

Wouldn't drinking Christ's blood AND eating His flesh make a person a cannibal/zombie rather than a vampire?



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
15:11:00 Nov 13 2012
Read 3,026 times

TWD: absolutely correct on your last point...but incorrect on your first.

James, who was Jesus' literal brother and who was his actual successor (Peter was not, as proved by the Book of Acts...amongst other NT references...in which Peter follows James' orders and not the other way around), argues against Paul's by-grace-alone heresy in his Epistle in which James correctly counters Paul saying "faith without works is dead." We show our faith BY our works. In other words: actions speak far more loudly than words. As per Jesus' true successor, Paul was wrong...as has been all of "Christianity" ever since given that all of it came not from Jesus but from Paul, a man who was never ordained an Apostle, never received the priesthood from those who had actually received it and who spent his life teaching contrary to the actual teachings of Jesus' true Apostles.



•  REPLY  •


DragonMother
DragonMother
Sire (102)
Posts: 827
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 15 years.
16:26:16 Nov 13 2012
Read 3,020 times

James was written to the saved. James was written to the believers.

Notice the phrase "my brethren" in James 1:2, James 1:16; James 1:19; James 2:1, James 2:5; James 2:14; James 3:1, etc. James writes to persons who are already saved and the subject is not how to be saved but the Christian life and how to receive rewards in heaven. James is writing to those who are "born again."

"Of his own will beget he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures (James 1:18)."

The question is not loss of salvation but the loss of reward. Blessing, not salvation, is what is promised to the doer of God's work in James 1:25.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
16:57:12 Nov 13 2012
Read 3,014 times

You speak in terms only Paul and his Roman disciples used. Jesus nor his apostles ever used such terms. Jesus' admonished his disciples to strive constantly toward perfection (Matthew 5:48) and that whoever loves God is obedient to His commands. No where does one find Jesus passing off all of salvation based on accepting Him as Savior and that's it. That heretical concept was Paul's invention, only.

However, this topic ought not to be sidetracked from its purpose. The point is that symbolic blood and flesh eating was a later invention based on a common meal shared before Jesus was arrested and does not appear to have ever been intended to become the sort of salvation ritual it only later became.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
17:25:07 Nov 13 2012
Read 3,012 times

If one seeks to understand original Christianity and its only eating/drinking rite, one must investigate the Agape feast, which was a common meal shared by the original Christians that had absolutely no reference at all to symbolically eating and drinking flesh and blood. Additionally, this rite contained a lost highly sexual component later banned by Pauline (i.e., Roman) Christianity and wholly replaced with the flesh/blood communion/sacrament rite it has had ever since.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
17:34:19 Nov 13 2012
Read 3,011 times

...and (oh, what the hell)...if one seeks to understand true historical Vampirism...it is that lost sexual/emotional/spiritual communion that formed the foundational purpose of the original Christian Agape that is the actual truth behind exactly who and what the Vampire (which term means "feaster" [literally..."one who feasts"]) was and is and always has been.

Thus...absolutely there is actual Vampirism in the Bible, but only if you know what historical (i.e., REAL) Vampirism actually was and still is. ;)



•  REPLY  •


Sinistra
Sinistra
Carnal Creature (56)
Posts: 120
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Coven of Elizabeth Batory is a member of an Alliance

Member of Coven of Elizabeth Batory
Vampire Rave member for 15 years.
18:32:24 Nov 16 2012
Read 2,974 times

This is a very opinionated argument going on in here and the word vampire being used is just one word from a language base that was not used everywhere or at the time the Bible was written. I personally don't like using it because I feel it came from mere superstition. No one as far as I can tell has ever come up with the ideas you have Upir, not even de Vere. I don't take it serious or more than just an extrapolated opinion, attempts to connect things by virtue of a preconceived idea. There are many ideas on this topic and none of them actually accepted over the others and some is mere parroting with no definitive research. Some with a lot of research but still only speculative.

The art of communication is to keep it simple when trying to explain something to a wide range of people with varying educational backgrounds and ages. The use of words that would impress are not necessary for the average reader, especially when talking about a controversial topic.

I "personally" do not consider Genesis to be related to Christianity but Judaism and incorporated since it is an offshoot. Whether it is what anyone was teaching at that time is doubtful to me except those that directly followed Judaism. Nazoreans had a different take although most didn't want to take away from the "Law" and it was not their purpose. Quite frankly there are no blatant descriptions of anything like a "vampire" in the Bible unless you choose to consider Jesus as such. The Nazoreans were Vegan as we call that type of diet now. The Jews were forbidden to drink blood and had to drain animals they killed for food so that didn't happen.

Cain was marked but it doesn't say transformed or give any inkling that might have to do with anything like vampire. This could have merely been what we now call a "birthmark" and similar to the misunderstanding of what the "Land of Nod" was. It means the life of a nomad. It was metaphorical and they used many things like that in those times. I have read articles where people will say Jesus was a vampire due to transubstantiation that he started at the Last Supper. I of course don't believe in any of these things at all but that is personal

The perspective most have on vampires is Eastern European which I believe was spread across the area by Gypsies (out of India) and then developed an intermixing of the various cultural beliefs already in place. They took on various characteristics added by them. Most of it dealing with lack of knowledge about the dying process.

I have read numerous and I mean numerous articles about vampires and even some by scholars and nowhere have I ever found the sexuality aspect. Those in mythology are revenants and depending on where you read about them, not living beings at all as far as use of the word vampire is concerned. This is why I discount the word vampire because often it was used to describe some evil despot who was sucking their subjects dry through taxing them and other things of this sort.

People connected the blood and demons, gods of old and many others got tagged as vampires in more modern times. Nothing I have seen written here is anything more than opinion. The word vampire wasn't in use in the time of the Bible so unless you want to throw in Lilith perhaps and that is sketchy at best, I would say NO. She was demonized just like Astarte merely because she was female and didn't adhere to the Patriarchal societies opinion of lady like behavior. Goddesses were discounted particularly.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
00:14:46 Nov 17 2012
Read 2,967 times

Sinistra, just as you accurately mentioned and described the Nazoreans based on knowledge, not opinion, so have I in reference to original Christianity and the historical origins of the Vampire. I recognized your accuracy in discussing such topic's as the Nazoreans and the reference to Astarte (which term is derived directly from Innana, actually) because, like you,I have also studied those subjects, too.

I would recommend that, despite having read numerous articles in vampires "some by experts" that you seek out and read far more of such by actual experts (Slavisists and Eastern/Central European Vampirologists, especially) so that you might likewise discover that my words were...as were many of yours...based also on knowledge and not opinion. Facts and truth are not decided based on their popularity.

As regards your statement that you have never trad anything if the Vampire's "sexuality aspect," permit me to provide but a few such references from actual experts:

"The vampire of folklore is a sexual creature, and his sexuality is obsessive– indeed, in Yugoslavia... he is apt to wear out his widow with his intentions, so that she too pines away, much like his other victims."

-- Vampires, Burial and Death: Folklore and Reality; P. Barber, 1988; p. 9

"Gypsies believed some vampires (the Nosferati) had an insatiable sexual appetite and would return from the grave to have sexual relations with their widow or a young woman of their choosing."

-- The Vampire Book, J. Gordon Melton, 1999; p. 616

"The folklore of Russia also described the vampire as a sexual being. Among the ways in which it made itself known was to appear in a village as a handsome young man. Circulating among the young people in the evening, the vampire lured unsuspecting women to their doom."

-- ibid.; p. 617(emphasis added)

"Gypies thought of the vampire as a sexual entity. The male vampire was believed to have such an intense sexual drive that his sexual need alone was sufficent to bring him back from the grave. His first act usually was to return to his widow, whom he engaged in sexual intercourse. Nightly visits could ensue over a period of time, with the wife becoming exhausted and emaciated."

-- ibid.; pp. 616-617(emphasis added)

"The sexual nature of the act is plainly indicated in the following examples. Heinrich von Wlislocki*, in his researches into Roumanian superstitions tells us: ...With young people it (The Nosferat) indulges in sexual orgies until they get ill and die of exhaustion. It often happens that women are impregnated by this creature and bear children..."

- On the Nightmare, E. Jones, pp. 117-118 (emphasis added) * a noted Austrian Gypsologist, from his publication Roumanian Superstitions, 1861 CE

( Note: If true that women indulged "...until they get ill and die of exhaustion", then how is it these same women were still alive nine months later to "bear children"? Obviously, this accusation is anything but truthful and was intended to falsely incite the populaces to violence against those vilified as "Vampires." )

"Mullos (Gypsy word for Vampire) also return to satisfy their prodigious sexual appetites... They are so insatiable that their human partners are likely to weaken and become ill with exhaustion."

- The Complete Vampire Companion (R Guiley, pp. 9-10) (emphasis added)



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
00:35:44 Nov 17 2012
Read 2,965 times

Note that the chief symptom of a vampire attack...that of "exhaustion and emaciation" found in almost all vampire tales, folklore, movies, etc. was actually described by the original Gypsies as the result of one thing only: continual, relentless sexual congress over nights (and days?). Now that blood-drinking is not once mentioned. In fact, actual modern vampire scholarship has repeatedly contradicted this assumption regarding vampires. For example, Dr. Bruce McClelland (Slayers and their Vampires: A Cultural History of Killing the Undead) points out that while Vampires have been known to exist since at least the 11th Century CE, yet the Western tales of them as blood-drinkers did not even begin until the 18th Century. So what were Vampires doing before then? ;)

And finally, Dr. Ipsas, herself a Romanian-born Vampirologist, publicly acknowledged in her address tatthe 2000 Dracula World Congress that "there are no blood suckers in Romanian history." This is further verified by Dr. Paul Barber in his exhaustive study "Vampires, Burial and Death: Folklore and Reality".

Again... the facts are out there and have been widely voiced by many doctorate-level scholars. But you won't find any of this mentioned in "Vampire" communities because it debunks the entire fiction-based culture they have created. Now doesn't it? ;)



•  REPLY  •


silentlord
silentlord
Malignant Spirit (49)
Posts: 564
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Wolves of Odin (Coven) is a member of an Alliance

Member of Wolves of Odin (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 13 years.
00:38:19 Nov 17 2012
Read 2,963 times

hmm here is apoint is jesus a vampire?



•  REPLY  •


HellsFire
HellsFire

No Longer Registered
18:28:33 Nov 17 2012
Read 2,946 times

Not in the modern sense.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
20:21:14 Nov 17 2012
Read 2,942 times

Demon - I wasn't going to respond to the question. But a you have...and correctly so...then, yes, I will follow yours with a bit of a response of my own.

The actions and purpose of the original Fallen Angels (as they have inaccurately been called by Christianity, and who were the Annunaki to the Sumerians, the Bene-Ha-Elohim [Sons of God] to the Hebrews [Genesis 6:1-4], among many others, and who have long been believed to be the forefathers of the Vampires) and their children, the Rephaim, born to Human women, parallel almost exactly with those, of the historical Jesus.

As with the Rephaim, Jesus was also born in the same way (born the result of sexual union between a celestial father and a Human mother), taught love and compassion to men to have them value and esteem these more feminine virtues in themselves so as to value women more, too. Jesus treated and championed women as equals and taught men to do likewise.




•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
20:41:17 Nov 17 2012
Read 2,941 times

Continuing on... this was exactly the sort of gender-equal (gylanic) society the Annunaki established in Sumer and that flourished for thousands of years...where male and female ruled together as King and Priestess. According to the Gospel of Thomas (which predates all the Biblical Gospels) and its companion Gospel, the Gospel of Philip, Jesus actual mission was not to establish a new religion but, instead, to unite male and female together...aa equals... in all ways, foremost in their marriage relationships with one another. This principle, this most sacred of all ordinances and the only actual "rite" taught and practiced by Jesus and his true disciples was called the "Sacrament of the Bridal Chamber", which parallels the same rite taught by the Annunaki to the Sumerians and was called "Hieros Gamos" (Saved Marriage).

And the ultimate reaction to both of these attempts by men was the same: demonization and annihilation. In both cases... the teachers were demonized as blood and flesh eaters (Book of Enoch, in the case of the children of the "fallen angels", and the blood/flesh-eating ritual of modern Christianity)...none of which was ever practiced by either!



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
20:58:41 Nov 17 2012
Read 2,938 times

However, Jesus apparently attempted something none of his predecessors had...in attempting to teach normal Human men to be fully equal with females...sexually.

As with all true descendants of the "angelic" (Annunaki) bloodline and as exemplified in the original annual Sumerian "Hieros Gamos" rite, Jesus was fully and naturally multiorgasmic (also the chief characteristic of the historical Vampire...because all are of the same angelic bloodline).

In the recently discovered letter containing an excerpt of what is called the "Secret Gospel of Mark", Jesus is depicted spending the night teaching a man "the secrets of the Kingdom of Heaven while both were naked. And while the gay community has jumped on this as evidence of hhomosexuality, yet actual scholars have responded decisively stating that nothing in the excerpt warrants such a conclusion; homosexuality was not an uncommon practice in the Greco-Roman world and would hardly constitute depiction as being termed "secrets of the kingdom of heaven."



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
21:10:31 Nov 17 2012
Read 2,937 times

... However...were Jesus attempting to "turn" a normal man, limited as all such men are by a mandatory "down time" after a full normal orgasm, into a naturally multiorgasmic being without such a built-in physiological limitation as are all such normal Human males...then Jesus would truly have been teaching him the greatest and most important "secret of the kingdom of heaven" that would permit him to finally be fully equal with females in all ways (assuming as one must that he had already learned Jesus' basic teachings on love, compassion, spirituality, etc., that Jesus taught at the introductory levels). Then this male disciple would be fully able to truly join with and commune with the female...to thus achieve together the greatest Human-divine potentials possible.

And that...as fills both Gospels of Thomas and Philip...was Jesus' true mission.

Thus yes, Jesus was a true Rephaim..



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
21:13:13 Nov 17 2012
Read 2,935 times

... or, in other words, a true Vampire.


(Please forgive the multiple posts. This smart phone stops letting me see what I'm typing after several lines)



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
21:18:08 Nov 17 2012
Read 2,934 times

"Hieros Gamos" means SACRED (not "Saved") Marriage (damn swype!)



•  REPLY  •


silentlord
silentlord
Malignant Spirit (49)
Posts: 564
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Wolves of Odin (Coven) is a member of an Alliance

Member of Wolves of Odin (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 13 years.
23:41:58 Nov 17 2012
Read 2,931 times

ah i see and what is a rephiam?



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
03:26:18 Nov 18 2012
Read 2,925 times

inition and Etymology of "Rephaim"

The name "Rephaim," by which this uniquely sexual progeny was known, derives from the word RAPHA (Strong's Ref. # 7497) meaning "invigorating"; which adjective is directly derived from the noun "vigor," which definitions include: {nouns} strength, energy, lustihood, stamina, virility, {adjectives} hard, potent, masculine, male, virile. Thus the very name "Rephaim" was apparently very specifically and accurately chosen to identify a unique sexual characteristic of this "fallen" race for which it was condemned and persecuted anciently.

As further defined by more contemporary sources:

"The tradition in Genesis 6:4 may reflect the Canaanite myth of the birth of minor gods from the union of El (God) and human women. The conception of the Rephaim as supermen may reflect the Canaanite tradition of defunct kings as rp'um, or Dispensers of fertility. The identity in tradition of 'the fallen ones' of Genesis 6:4 and the Rephaim is supported by the nature of the latter in Proverbs 2:18; Job 26:5 and Phoenician funerary inscriptions." - John Gray, Near Eastern Mythology

last paragraph at: http://www.lists.lightbearer.com/immortal-l/1998/07/msg00323.html (emphasis



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
06:08:53 Nov 18 2012
Read 2,912 times

Pretty much the middle-school response expected. No worries, the deeper material provided wasn't intended for you.



•  REPLY  •


SatansChild
SatansChild
Superior Sire (146)
Posts: 2,228
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 19 years.
15:45:20 Nov 18 2012
Read 2,906 times

You didn't say which Bible ?
King James version ,,, I would say no too both questions .
The new Testament ,, I'd say yes too Human Vampires .
The old school Saints really did drink blood at All the services @ rituals among other things .



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
00:24:30 Nov 19 2012
Read 2,884 times

@Satanschild ...

... Would be very interested to learn where you find the original Christians drinking actual blood.



•  REPLY  •


Jeff18
Jeff18
Grave Robber (22)
Posts: 4
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Member of Legion (Coven)
Vampire Rave member for 13 years.
15:23:46 Nov 20 2012
Read 2,847 times

in the bible
it describes Nephilum
in the book of Enoch the children of such were described
when you look at both books then read farther in the book of Enoch
it mentions the children as both cannibalistic and blood thirsty
this is (I believe) where the first scene of vampirism occurs
in the same breath it is not absolutely in my opinion exact evidence of such



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
17:34:14 Nov 20 2012
Read 2,837 times

Actually, the Bible directly contradicts the Book of Enoch in describing the offspring of the Nephilim/BeneHaElohim (Sons of God).

Genesis 6 describes then in glowing terms as "... might men as of old, men of renown "

This description, written hundreds if not thousands of years before the Book of Enoch, matches the descriptions given by the Sumerians and Egyptians. These demi-god children of Celestial Fathers who descended, married Human women and had children by them, were Earth's first rulers and were absolutely not cannibalistic.

Then...about the time of Jesus (1st Century BCE)...along comes the Book of Enoch claimed written by someone who lived thousands of years earlier and claims to give a first-hand report that contradicts everything previously written...thousands of years AFTER the time such events



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
17:53:43 Nov 20 2012
Read 2,836 times

Point is...when facing two directly contradictory accounts, which is logically going to be more accurate: the accounts written by Sumerian, Babylonian and Canaanite sources (who came from Babylon, themselves, bringing with them the same accounts) all of which tell corroborating stories written much closer to the time these events happened...or an account written thousands of years later by an unknown source claiming to be Enoch, himself?



•  REPLY  •


Severus
Severus
Sire (107)
Posts: 517
Honor: 0
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 17 years.
05:49:47 Nov 21 2012
Read 2,824 times

It may be note worthy to state something that should be obvious to a site like this. The fact that Vampires draw life force/energy from other living things... That is what it means to be vampiric. The fact that often gets lost on the uninformed is that just because this can be done via human blood doesn't mean that anyone who consumes blood a vampire.

So the resulting passage (correct or not) which mentions the children being cannibalistic and blood thirsty doesn't translate in to vampirism because the key component of gaining or drawing in life force from another is not present in the tale.

I would argue that no where in the Bible does it describe this type of activity.



•  REPLY  •


Oceanne
Oceanne
Noble Sire (160)
Posts: 4,490
Honor: 11
[ Give / Take ]
Vampire Rave member for 18 years.
12:40:24 Nov 21 2012
Read 2,818 times

If we are going to look at to Upir's research in this,it would seem to me that one conclusion would be that insatiable sex drive(nympho) would, and does make the participants "Feel like the life has been sucked out"..Especially if it goes on for days.
And if this drive,does somehow linked to the Nephilim..
Then I would say the bible has reffs.



•  REPLY  •


UpirLikhyj
UpirLikhyj

No Longer Registered
18:47:34 Nov 21 2012
Read 2,812 times

Thanks for your entries, Severus and Oceanne!

Actually... the Vampire, as described in the original Eastern and Central European accounts before the West got hold of them and reinvented them as blood-drinking and/or life energy-sucking entities, did not possess such characteristics... ever. All of this was the result of Westernized fictions beginning in/about the 18th Century (as Dr. Bruce McClelland documented so well).

The actual Central/Eastern European Vampire was as he had always been portrayed even up to the newspaper reports of the early 20th Century: as an insatiable sexual entity who participates in multiorgasmic communion with equally orgasmically insatiable females.

Oceanne...while, yes, such communion is physically draining, yet this detracts from the actual cause of the primary symptoms reported of such "vampiric" activity.

In 1995, I had the opportunity to converse at length with one of the most prolific sex researchers known: Dr. Beverly Whipple. In discussing the physiological effects of long-term multiorgasmic activity, she offered an amazing explanation for the hyper-orgasmic euphoria experienced.

... that, later, when I began really researching Vampirism, explained in full what was described!



•  REPLY  •


VR System
VR System

No Longer Registered
18:47:34 Nov 21 2012
Read 2,812 times

This thread has been automatically closed for length.



•  REPLY  •



• • • • THIS THREAD IS CLOSED • • • •
•  Closed by VR System on Nov 21 2012  •

•  General Discussion Home  •   Forums Home  •

COMPANY
REQUEST HELP
CONTACT US
SITEMAP
REPORT A BUG
UPDATES
LEGAL
TERMS OF SERVICE
PRIVACY POLICY
DMCA POLICY
REAL VAMPIRES LOVE VAMPIRE RAVE
© 2004 - 2026 Vampire Rave
All Rights Reserved.
Vampire Rave is a member of 
Page generated in 0.9172 seconds.
X
Username:

Password:
I agree to Vampire Rave's Privacy Policy.
I agree to Vampire Rave's Terms of Service.
I agree to Vampire Rave's DMCA Policy.
I agree to Vampire Rave's use of Cookies.
•  SIGN UP •  GET PASSWORD •  GET USERNAME  •
X