The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

I am currently reading the Book of Enoch and I am wanting theories or ideas on this subject.

What it is for those who have not heard of it, is one of the books from the Apocrypha, books that did not make it into the bible.

Now my interest so far is in the book of The Watchers, where 200 Angel come down to earth.

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
2and 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.

Chapter 8
1 And Azazel taught men to make swords, and knives, and shields, and breastplates, and made known to them the metals of the earth and the art of working them, and bracelets, and ornaments, and the use of antimony, and the beautifying of the eyelids, and all kinds of costly stones, and all
2 colouring tinctures. And there arose much godlessness, and they committed fornication, and they
3 were led astray, and became corrupt in all their ways. Semjaza taught enchantments, and root-cuttings, 'Armaros the resolving of enchantments, Baraqijal (taught) astrology, Kokabel the constellations, Ezeqeel the knowledge of the clouds, Araqiel the signs of the earth, Shamsiel the signs of the sun, and Sariel the course of the moon. And as men perished, they cried, and their cry went up to heaven . . .

Also it mentions the knowledge the Angels bring with them, astrology, enchantments etc.

Now these are ideas that are frowned upon by the bible following churches of today, yet was it past on by the Angels and I know these teachings predate bible times but could this be one of the places it all started? If so doesn't that "prove" in a way that "magic" for lack of a better word is real.


http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/ethiopian/enoch/1watchers/watchers.htm

I've been reading these writings, too, Veela. For your specific question re. magic, I don't think mention of herbs and plants or any of the teachings "proves" magic.

Magic actually working proves magic.

Finding giant human remains proves there were giant humans.

Plus, I still have to get over why all the Watchers had penises in which to mate with the beautiful Daughters of Man.

I'm sorry "magic" was a word I used which was poorly chosen!

What I meant was it is giving us a history of where the use of charms, enchantments, astrology, constellation, knowledge of the clouds, earth and planets could of come from, that from higher beings at that.

And wasn't all evidence of them destroyed.

you bring up a good point veela, now I for one have never read or heard of these books, but based on what you posted, I would have to agree that should these writings be real, than indeed it would prove that the use of herbs, enchantments and so on, would have come from a higher being. It is something that i would definitely like to look into more.

curious why these where left out of the bible, I would imagine that the church would have been overwhelmed by all the people claiming to be spawn of angels.

The book of enoch also tells of the times of the apocolyse, and describes more on the Nephilim.

As well as the powers of the angels and what virtues they teach.

There is also the book of Raziel the book given to adam by the angel Raziel upon their expulsion from eden, which gives them the names, and powers of all the angels in their season, and times to coax from the natures the virtues which will allow them to endure the life with the knowledge they had of good and evil.

the book of enoch is a history lesson in angelic mythos.

While it is not my intention to bible-bash, I have to bring up the question of authentication. It is said (and mounds of evidence presented) that these books were written by primitive man and were the same as every myth around the world: attempts to explain nature by people who didn't understand it. Just because someone wrote that an angel taught them divination doesn't make it any more true than if I say an angel lives in my basement. What you're saying here, is that if the bible is true, then these books verify that magic, divination, etc. was taught by angels, and that there were giants walking the earth at one time. Your error, however, is the blind assumption that the bible (and subsequent rejected books thereof) are infallibly true.

Who said they were true?

There is not one reference of belief in here. The history of how these texts are written, and what they describe themselves as.

I can also tell you the sefer yetzirah tells the hebrew mystic, how to vibrate each of the 22 letter of the alpha-bet with all their vowel combinations, which takes 20 years to learn how to do, can successfully create from the power of the intonations a soul, and body.

Thats the thing with hebrew magicks, its not about whats written by man. But whats chronicled in those histories as being the events at the time. So to them, its how they are.

So becareful where you tread in your line of thought, you might miss the point.

I wasn't really responding to your statements. I was really only writing in response to the final paragraph of the first post.

Now these are ideas that are frowned upon by the bible following churches of today, yet was it past on by the Angels and I know these teachings predate bible times but could this be one of the places it all started? If so doesn't that "prove" in a way that "magic" for lack of a better word is real.

Upon subsequent reading, I'm getting a different interpretation of her meaning, but at first glance, it seemed awfully matter-of-fact. Forgive me if I was mistaken in thinking so. I'm too tired to be doing this. lol.

I agree with you LaMuerte.

These writings appear to be precursors to the Old Testament, especially in the vilification of the seductive females. The telltale sign is use of phrases like "defile themselves with them."

Interesting that herbology was taught to the women and warfare was taught to the men.

"and drink the blood," has been used as an example of vampirism. And the Angelic lessons those of aliens enamored with Earth.

"and bracelets, and ornaments, and the use of antimony, and the beautifying of the eyelids, and all kinds of costly stones, and all
2 colouring tinctures. And there arose much godlessness," leading to the usual fornication, all sounding once again like Babylonia, and other such places where
good times were just too good.

in Rome when Christianity became very popular among the people the roman government decided to make Christianity a legal religion.

they told the Christians to condense their teachings into one book and the bible was born.

unfortunately modern Christianity ignores the rest of the teachings and considers them not valid. most of the original bible was lost throughout the years. if it were not for the Enoch we wouldn't know half of what was lost.

It Is True,The Roman Catholics have a larger canon than Protestants. This means that Roman Catholics have some inside books that Protestants consider outside.

http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/Bible/outside.stm

According to E.C. Prophet in "Fallen Angels and the Origins of Evil," Enoch is the great-grandfather of Noah. Enoch "walked w/God" and God shared some secrets with him and allowed him to return to earth and give these secrets to his kids.

The Watchers, the fallen angels (Watcher = Wicked) took on human bodies. I guess they all chose to be guys, and hence the penises. You'd think --- given their rebellious, experimental, and sensual natures --- that a few would have said what the hell, I'll wear a vagina.

The fact that the writings don't show this variance indicates to me the all too human involvement in the telling of these stories which are heavily influenced by the paternalistic culture of the time.

For me, it shows the writings came out of the minds of men and was not put there by some disembodied force with little concept of gender or sexuality.

BloodMother

Chapter 6
1 And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters.
2 And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men
3 and beget us children.' And Semjaza, who was their leader, said unto them: 'I fear ye will not
4 indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.' And they all answered him and said: 'Let us all swear an oath, and all bind ourselves by mutual imprecations
5 not to abandon this plan but to do this thing.' Then sware they all together and bound themselves
6 by mutual imprecations upon it. And they were in all two hundred; who descended in the days of Jared on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn
7 and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it. And these are the names of their leaders: Samlazaz, their leader, Araklba, Rameel, Kokablel, Tamlel, Ramlel, Danel, Ezeqeel, Baraqijal,
8 Asael, Armaros, Batarel, Ananel, Zaq1el, Samsapeel, Satarel, Turel, Jomjael, Sariel. These are their chiefs of tens.

I guess in the story it was really only 200 that were lusting over women that came together and decided to act on it though I understand that you feel it strange that they weren't lusting over the males as well.

lusting over the males wasn't exactly what I was getting at, but why not? If I was a celestial being not only would I want to do every creature that walked the earth, I'd probably be a hermaphrodite and convince one of my Watcher buddies to be the same for the ultimate thrill.

Putting such titillation aside, my point is that this story begins with the physical and the celestial combining, but the combination is pro forma. It begins with SEX and the angels are damned for doing it with humans.

That the angels are "males" or assume human male genitalia in order to consummate their desires with human females is in itself just too damn coincidental, especially if you consider history and the relative power endowed to the "holy males" and the victimized females: witch trials, midwives, crones in charge of herbal medicinals, and insatiable succubi all charged with the duty of corrupting the other, in this case, the males or the male imposters in the form of Watchers.

And all of this is even before we get to the Predictions.

Why not just make a pact with your Watcher gang to mess with the humans, teach them all manner of stuff: GIVE THEM KNOWLEDGE, and sit back and see what happens?

Don't materialize penises. Don't have sex with humans. Don't procreate giants who mess shit up on earth.

lol... :D

Do you think they knew before hand what the outcome of their offspring on the serounding humans would of been. I don't.

Also in Jude 1: 6-7 these events are mentioned.
Jude 1:6-7 (New American Standard Bible)
6And (A)angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has (B)kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day,

7just as (C)Sodom and Gomorrah and the (D)cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and (E)went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an (F)example in undergoing the (G)punishment of eternal fire.

So here we have in the New Testerment, in a book that is in the Bible, talking about it!

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jude%206-7&version=49;

Typos ahh sorry, lack of sleep is getting to me :)


I guess what I am saying is we have the Bibles version of why there was the flood, then we have Enoch's.
And really Enoch's sounds more of a reason to destroy everything.

And I am not saying here that I believe word for word that with out a doubt these are factional events, but I just find it interesting that, these books have been pushed aside, yet religions have been made following the Bible.

bible, written.. then some bright spark comes along and says 'I missed this out'.. dead sea scrolls, Enochian.. etc.. Geez.. How much did get missed out?
..
Simply put.. there are teachings and teaching's.. but to say one came before the other is non-sensical, as all of these teachings have been bastardised to suit us, over years.

perhaps it was consider to be obviously plagerized? A few deleted Words of God have been determined to have origin aside from Christian/catholic origin the more obvious ones have been edited or paraphrase.1

I don't have nuch to add to what has been said here - just wanted to state that I love the Book of Enoch. It gave me the idea that the first vampires came from the union of these angels and women.

As I have not read but what you have posted I can not give as good advice as I would like but I will try. accroding to the text the men taught of the "magic" and that when the giants came they destroyed the men, and mankind. But what what it does not tell and i would like to know is weather or not the women passed down there knowledge before they were wiped out, that would answer wether or not the magic and the forms we practice it in today is real or if we only have a slight grasp on what it could really be.

the story of Noah is older than the bible. all of the older religions from the middle east have a version of Noah and the great flood.

archaeologist say that evidence points to the great flood and a flash flood that came from the mountains into the dead sea. if you dig deep enough you can find stories about Noah in Sumerian, Babylonian, and Islam also. everyone has their own take on it. Christianity being the newest of the old religions just has the most famous version.

when the bible was created in the early 300s ce at nicea, the bishops sat down and went through the books that were considered holy. they decided what went in and what didnt.

as to why any books were left out, it was because they didnt conform to the doctrine they were establishing.

i havent read this book, but i think it would be very interesting.

No smoke with out fire for sure.
Don’t take the gospels as being.. gospels lol
You will find the same stories speed through all religions and myths only with twists.
The Celtics had a number of sisters who planed to slaughtered there husbands but were caught and set adrift in a stormy sea.
they found England and named it “Albion “ after the oldest sister Albina, dark brooding spirits came from the sky and encircled them with shadowy arms intoxicated them with flaming breath .
they bore birth to hideous giants … and the rest will make a rather good film when Brutus and a load of Trojan solders went to kill them and re name the land Britain after Brutus.

Basically history speaks of giants and spirits no matter what your faith … something went on and it was supernatural and had giants.
The book of Enoch makes me think it was DNA splicing as they note that the women could not give birth and they took them from the womb and gave life… hate to see how they extracted them… ah well read on read on … this will make a rather good film im sure

and this is a link
book of enoch

I myself have read a couple of "theories" and "stories" of Menoch. If you are intrested in things that never made it into the bible, you may want to check out on the history channle "banned from the bible pt.1 & 2". It definately helps you understand the things that are missing, those questions no one wants to answer. Anyone who has read the Bible knows there are things that are left out, because there are too many unanswered questions.

I have watched them both and according to their research there are things that were not put in the bible because a bunch of men gathered together and decided what was important and what wasn't important for the rest of us to know. I think that is crap. What is important to me may not be important to someone else and vice versa.

Yes I believe in majik and yes it really works. Did it come here by angels, ancients, demons, etc.. I am not sure. I know that it's practices have been around since the dawn of time.

LadyMajik

Yes the Naicea council decided what was important and what wasn’t, they had to as the religion was split between three camps so the trinity was invented to help clean it up and unite all factions and “The Church” became what it is today.

The book of Enoch was wise not to be added as we see the angels found the maidens fair and the rest is history lol

Interesting book but it is fiction. Was also considered fiction a couple thousand of years ago. But take comfort knowing that JC did indeed read the book and got his title from it, "The Son of Man." You might pick some things up from it but don't take anything in it as fact. The book also inspired some other books of interest throughout years including Dante's.

one can easily just classify anything of a religious nature as fiction, but how can one do this so easily unless one really knows? there is that which is impossible, that which is unlikely, and that which is just being mistold.

personally im not ready to just classify any of these tales as being in any particular category.

The Book of Enoch speaks of the Anunnaki and they were believed to have come from another planet and created the inhabitants of earth.

To take any thing into literal context from the bible is to take it with a grain of salt. Since we all know there is no true author if said book, save for alleged prophets, acolytes, disciples, teachers like moses or whathaveyou.

The books of Enoch, Mary (not sure which mary), Jesus, and the rumoured to be "texts of Nod" which I highly doubt...Are a couple of books that were left out of the bible based solely on conspiracy theories.

I will not bash the bible, nor any religion or point of view thereof, but I will say that some of the texts in the bible were blantantly left out as well.

Someone or someones within the church might have thought the bible might contradict the teachings of the church...Which in my opinion is why there are several versions and languages that translate the bible differantly with differant wording altogether.

Enoch as ~Infernalmage~ has already stated is a history of the Angelics pertaining to their historical relevance within the bible. Why this book as well as the others were left out, I will leave to said conspiracy theories.

As I have oft commented on the Book of Enoch and its import, both in previous forum topics as well as in my online journal here, I won't elaborate at length except to say that already in this thread there are many errors, assumptions, and misunderstandings regarding same. The Book of Enoch needs to be read by all... but only together with the original much-abbreviated account found in Genesis 6 (written at least hundreds of years earlier and, thus, more likely to be more accurate) as well as the accounts of this same group of celestial visitors recounted in Sumerian, Babylonian, and even ancient American texts (e.g., Pre-Incan, Aztec, Mayan). Or... simply read "Fingerprints of the Gods" by Graham Hancock for a wondeful synopsis of all these accounts and the same small group of men who visited all these cultures anciently and taught the same things to them all!

At the time of the New Testament, the Book of Enoch was considered by the Israelites as well as the newfound Christian movement to be correct and true. In fact, the initial account of Genesis 6 had always been considered true, as well, by the Israelites. I was heartened to read above that at least one of you made the key connection -- at least in part -- between the Book of Enoch and the Book of Jude in the NT. What was not pointed out is that the Book of Jude was a call to arms against a previously undiscovered group of "fallen-angel" descendants who had entered the Christian community, probably in Asia Minor (present-day Turkey, which is located only a few hundred miles southeast of the Slavic lands of the "vampire"), and who were there introducing the Christian communities to their own highly advanced sensuality, the actual sexual "feasting" practices of those later to be vilified not as "fallen angels" but as ... "vampires." And thus, the Book of Jude provides the historical "smoking gun" evidence that the descendants of the "fallen angels" had survived to the "Christian Era," were then residing just south of the Black Sea area, and were there recognized for the very same trait that only a few hundred years later would likewise identify these same descendants by a new pejorative moniker, "vampires," in the lands just north of that same area. And that identifying trait for which they were known in the Books of Genesis, Enoch, and Jude was the same: their "superhuman" male sexual and emotional capacity that matched that of most Human females and thus, in Israelite and Christian eyes, vilified them all as evil. This also fully explains why females have likewise been very similarly vilified by such religions as inherently inferior, as well.

The one major problem with the Book of Enoch that must be remembered is this: it was written thousands of years after the events it purports to recount. Thus, its accuracy of such events is highly questionable given the enormous gulf of time separating the 100 BCE authors thereof from the events they attempt to describe, which occurred prior to 3,000 BCE and most likely occurred ca. 8,000 - 7,000 BCE, the time of the actual Black Sea Flood that most likely was the catastrophic flood remembered by all in the Near East (Sumer, Bablyon, Canaan, etc.) as the "Great Deluge."


- Upir'

Very interesting, i have been reading the online book from yesterday and i dont take any of it literally but i find it interesting as a story that talks of angels and gods judgements, there is plenty of good reading in the book that relates to other biblical characters which helps me understand more about the bible

I had friends copy of the apocrypha when I lived in Israel... but I haven't read it since 1990... I think I have seen copies online, but I haven't seen anything hardbound recently, except for enoch.

Can anyone recommend a good version?

I love to read Angelology and Demonology and the book of Enoch was a great and wonderful story.I did my research on both sides of the story. I found out that Angles fallen or Heaven bound as people perceive them are Eunuch.
So I am finding this fun but maybe not all were Eunuchs.
Some might of been Hermaphrodites and able to procreate.
But I am finding it hard to accept that the Nephilim were Giants.But Again not a hard story to come up with the Greeks thought that the Gods On MT. Olympus Were also giants.But Those Gods were Worshiped By man To give men the Image I can be ultimate and have many woman hence Zeus and his impeccable lust for mortal women.Perhaps same goes with what is written about the Fallen Angels?
Like Bloodmother has already stated its a man thing

ravenstrigoi -

Eunuchs and hermaphrodites? I would very much enjoy learning where you read this. I don't recall reading anything about this in either the Books of Enoch or Genesis.

As for perhaps being able to procreate, there is no doubt about it. Both the Books of Enoch and Genesis said they married women and with them had children (which would be kinda hard to do if you're a eunuch).

As for them being giants, only the Book of Enoch (written hundreds of years after Genesis and 1,000s of years after the events themselves) makes mention of them as such. The only other reference to them (or rather, their children) being "giants" is found only in the King James Version (Genesis 6:1-4) where the translators deliberately took out the original word "Nephilim" ("fallen ones") and replaced it with "giants." Obviously, the two words have nothing in common at all.


- Upir'

I do not remember the book I had read For it was so long ago.Most of my information is off line I actually go to a library.
Or an Occult book store I know that in the book Of Enoch and Genesis They are mentioned as to having being males.
I also stated I did some research on both sides of the story.
Each Author whom writes on Angels has their own opinion and one can not take it all at face value.I was just putting up what I had read not what I believed as far as sex organs go. And I still think that all that is written back in those times.
Men were chauvinistic and this falls in the line of the dogmatic view of the Alpha male.

Here was something I have in my Angel/Demonology notes
I do not take this site as a face value

Was Adam made in the image of Elohim, androgyny?

What must not be forgotten was that Adam was created in the image or reflection of Elohim (Gn. 1:27)—the Creator. This means that the human body manifests many of the spiritual attributes of Elohim's spiritual body.

Elohim's spiritual body is both male and female in principle, then Adam's body must be created to reflect this. Basically, Elohim's spiritual body is made-up of nine attributes such as Intelligence, Wisdom, Knowledge, Love, Beauty, Justice, Foundation, Power, and Strength. In fact, each of these spiritual attributes is both male and female.

What this means is that all spiritual attributes have both a female and male counterpart. For example, Intelligence and Wisdom have a gender. Solomon makes this point when he assigns the female gender to Wisdom. He writes in the Proverb: "Does not wisdom call out? Does not understanding raise her voice (Pro. 8:1)?"

The male side of Intelligence and Wisdom is logic and critical thinking, while the feminine side is more intuitive and caring. Both are necessary for the creative process to work. There is no domination of one over the other, for they both are equal or exist as King and Queen. Clearly, this is a model of perfection or androgyny and it is the balance of the male and female principle in one.


http://www.plim.org/Male%20and%20Female%20Androgyny.htm

(Genesis 19:10-12; Revelation 7:2; 8:3; 10:7). However, this does not necessarily indicate that all all angels are male. Matthew 22:30 seems to indicate that angels are “sexless,” without gender: “For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.” If angels do not marry, there is no need for gender, at least not in the sense of human gender distinctions. I think I am now getting to deep in to Angel/demonology.I will step out for a while and read what others thoughts are On the Book of Enoch.

ravenstrigoi -

I was very impressed with your responses... which perhaps surprisingly hint at greater topics regarding perhaps the greater Human potentials possible, for which purposes, it might be argued, the male "angels" descended in the first place.

Indeed the stereotypical "alpha male" chauvinism is abundantly evidenced throughout history, which narrow-mindedness as for millennia subverted and repressed not only female strength and wisdom but, in the process, also ironically limited male emotional and spiritual development, as well.

Not to be confused with androgyny, if defined as a lack of gender or the repression of such, yet what seems to be your point here, is being described as a harmonious co-existence both within the individual and, thus, by extension in Society at large, of the strengths and wisdom of BOTH sexes.

To my view, this would seem exactly what the historical Jesus (Yeshua) was attempting to teach and promulgate as so eloquently stated in the "Gospel of Thomas":

"...Yeshua says to them: When you make the two one, and you make the inside as the outside and the outside as the inside and the above as the below, and if you establish the male with the female as a single unity so that the man will not act masculine and the woman not act feminine... then shall you enter [the Sovereignty]." (Gospel of Thomas, v. 22)

And consider, then, this from the "Gospel of Philip":

"The males indeed are those who mate with the souls inhabiting a female form, yet the females are those who unite with a male form— thru an inequality. And no one will be able to escape from these (once¹) they seize him (unless¹) he receives both male and female power— which is the Bridegroom with the Bride. Yet one receives them in the mirrored Bridal-Chamber." (Gospel of Philip, v. 65)


Note the mention of an "inequality" inherent between male and female... and then consider the portent of the events leading to the following exchange between Salome and Jesus (Yeshua) that has her ask, in apparent surprise and amazement, the following:

"Salome says: Who art thou, man? As if (sent) by someone, thou laid upon my bed and thou ate from my table.¹ || Yeshua says to her: I-AM he who is from equality. To me have been given the things of my Father. || (Salome says:) I'm thy Disciple.² || (Yeshua says to her:) Thus I say that whenever someone equalizes he shall be filled with light, yet whenever he divides³ he shall be filled with darkness." (Gospel of Thomas, v. 61b)

(By the by... the word "bed," above literally means just that... not a reclining couch or a bench or a sofa as some Bible "scholars" attempt to portray. This can be verified HERE.)


Of course, the greater questions remain: of what "equality" do these Gospels speak? What exactly is the "Sacrament of the Bridal Chamber," considered the greatest of all the Christian ordinances... and yet disappeared completely from view within only a couple centuries of Jesus' murder? And what was it about Jesus that so apparently astonished Salome that after knowing Jesus well enough to have invited him to eat at her table and, apparently go to bed with her... yet still has her afterward asking him "Who art thou?" And why did he answer her by professing an male-female "equality" he apparently possessed so unlike other men? And no... this is not about physical androgyny or hermaphroditism, otherwise no "bridal chamber" ordinance would have been mentioned as key to obtaining "male and female power" that apparently results in this "equality."


Kinda makes one re-think the vilification of at least one apparently particular branch of sacred sexuality for which the "fallen angels" were apparently so successfully vilified by the Books of Enoch.

Just something to chew on. ;)


- Upir'

Now for a response based on conspiracy theory:

The Annunaki were giant humanoids, standing on average 15 foot tall and a lot heavier and more muscular than normal humans, visiting Earth from their home planet, (nibiru) termed the Planet of the Crossing by the ancient Summerians and Planet X by NASA. The life on the 12th Planet is the annunaki and the planet Nibiru, the giant planet that supposedly causes the periodic pole shifts (Though I am sure the blackhole has something major to do with it as well).

The primary race is a humanoid race, who would be and have been considered giants by humans on Earth. They had a hierarchical structure that is similar to today's democracies. The Annunaki dress in attire similar to ancient greek and roman soldiers. But this is no coincidence since the romans and greeks wanted to dress in their god's image. That's right they were deemed as gods in the eyes of early men.

But really, at the time the technology to fly in a UFO was very ahead of ours. The annunaki were on earth to mine gold for their home planet's atmosphere because of the fact that there planet is almost always so far away from the sun that the heat from the inner core is always dissipating from the atmosphere out to space. So they were here and they decided to meddle with early man (homo erectus), the first man to stand upright.

They made slaves or an Annunaki-human hybrid (to which I always laugh at the roleplayers who think they are "hybrid"). The slaves mined for the precious minerals they need. Today, some of the highest of world leaders are Annunaki-human hybrids. Have you ever wondered why humans have so many diseases. It is because of the human's genetics being fooled with.

Where are the Annunaki now? They are on one moon of Mar, Phobos, to mine for gold and they have shot down many of earth's probes.

Why doesn't the government want the public to know about this? It has to do with the war in Iraq. Saddam Hussein, first of all had ancient sumerian cuneiforms that Bush wanted himself. Why? We don't really know but he may be An annunaki-human hybrid himself.

Speaking of Saddam Hussein, he had a blue stone in his upper left arm that he had made for him by fortunetellers and psychics to aid him in the war. In an assasination attempt a soldier pointed a gun at Saddam and pulled the trigger(the gun jammed), Then Saddam pulled the gun out of the soldier's hand and said this is how you kill someone and shot him. I know I got off topic but Saddam = Anunaki-Human hybrid or not?

Anyway, have you ever wondered what the Annunaki looked like? Well to see their image look at a picture of the sphinx's face, the mars face (which is a sighting spot for ufo's of the Annunaki telling them to land there), or look at the Hampshire crop circle. Speaking of the sphinx, the head of an Annunaki and why the body of a lion? Well, the body of a lion symbolizes a hunter of lion's and this was a big tradition for the Annunaki when they came to earth they would hunt lion's and the most powerful male would be burried in the sphinx, a burial chamber.

Of the Annunaki were Enki and Enlil the source of the story for Cain and Abel. They had a powerful sibling rivalry and it ended in destruction. The story of David and Goliath was also originated from the Annunaki. How? They simbolized man against the Annunaki. That is why Goliath was so tall, because the Annunaki were 15 feet tall. Jack and the beanstalk and the city of gold from the spaniards and the indians. The story of the red sea parting and the story of noah's ark and that great flood (all Annunaki). The most amazing though was the fountain of youth. The Annunaki seemed to live forever because on their planet the greatest of all of them bathed in antideterriorating particles that kept them from aging and they would live for up to 500,000 years.

Links to this may vary to a variety of sources, and plenty of research to boot. Do what you will with it.

Now back to the thread...

I understand why is conspiracy theory, jeje!. For the most is accountable they did went to Africa to mine, and they did create us in less time than time would've , we would've still primitive if we relied on "evolution", and perhaps in a more hairy appearance; they "release" in a case when the homo-sapiens became hard to manner with, so they saw us as blood relatives and with part of spiritual morale, so it enters in another case in terms of responsability of actions, new vessels of independent progression in need to achieve a enlightened state. They were/are between 10'-12' tall for most of that certain species and some (son of gods) still here and seemed as the true immortal by those who hold such privilege of knowing and witnessing; humans and hybrids bow to them, and no those in powers aren't hybrids at all, they are chosen for the cause and roll by say "play". Their are vast amount of different "aliens"and even those who look like us are descendants of their doings as well. As I researched among my source: with the homo-erectus they engineered the new men, "men of renown", and those tall men( sons of gods- "those who came from heavens to earth") mixed with the daughters of men (women from the men of renown(the new breed) their is where the hybrid "came to be" a mixed between them and the creation itself, so the blood were on its purest yet diluted form in the "hybrid" than in the "homo-sapiens". The watchers are just that, watchers on Earth orchestrating and observing the race, the link between this world and the outsiders, they as well are put in play, they don't hold any power of sorts, only what is given to work with(superhuman abilities, and I believe that is enough of this.

Angelic/demonic analogies are interpretations stemming from the christian denominations and interpretations of early priest> in other words, interpretations of those who believed in the christian source of the ancient knowledge, they were seem as angels and demons from the interpretations in abrahamic rootings which were just that: interpretations this images of people with wings as angels and "fallen ones", as fallen angels or demons.

There was a reason why it didn't make it in the Bible. Its fiction. It was considered fiction during JC's time too. But it was very popular among some classes of people and it did make the rounds. After all, it was the only book that gave a hint of what heaven was like. It made good reading. Even Jesus read this book and it's where he himself picked the title "Son of Man" from. Enjoy the book for what it is but don't let it go to your head.

We all very well know that these "books" are portrayed as fiction, but why not give them the benefit of the doubt instead of our minds having been already conditioned to think less about a history that we do not know, which is based solely on what "the man" has taught us from the beginning of our lives?

Conspiracy or no, most of it in my perspective is outlined as "credible" evidence. Now, if someone were to give some hard fact that this did not actually take place, them more power to them... Not even the greatest minds in the world could prove these accusations to be falsified, no matter how many degrees they had in their pocket.

I say these things are of circumstantial evidence based on a world that the "religious" persecutors dont want the world to know about for the sake of proving the "church" wrong and all religion null and void. Which is why the book amongst others like it were taken deliberately out of the bible.

The Book of James was in the Bible at one time but the Book of Enoch never was. It was never credible. Ever. Not sure if it was ever meant to be either. There is no prove what-so-ever. Period.

Its a good fiction read. That's it. It also lead inspiration to some other tales about Heaven
/ Hell too. You may guess what they were.

No angel ever fell from God's grace. None from this book nor Lucifer himself after his rebellion. Don't believe this stuff. Not even you/us can. Not possible. And to think that a fallen angel will have sex and have giant children from the joining? You're kidding, right?

The stories sound fun to read but really folks ...

Another book removed do to the way men were back then.
Because women were not equals was The Gospel of Mary Magdalene.And since I am not of a christian religion I decided to read it because it was written by a woman.
I wanted to see why the Catholics wanted her hidden.
I will leave the reading up to you.

this sound like an intresting read i havent picked it up yet but im thinking of it very soon

If I may... the "Book of Enoch" was well known and well regarded in Jesus' day... and even by Church Fathers. The well-known phrase "Son of Man," by which Jesus was known and, if the Gospels are to be believed, also as Jesus repeatedly called himself, originated in the Book of Enoch ("Son of Man" is mentioned 18 times therein... yet is not found in the Old Testament). Additionally, 2 Peter and Jude in the New Testament both quote or cite from the Book of Enoch. These facts are attested to HERE.

Additionally, Paul's admonition to women that they cover their heads "because of the angels" (1 Corinthians 11:10), which admonitiion is found nowhere else in the Bible, certainly indicates strongly to the effect the Book of Enoch had upon him and the general renewed interest given the "Fallen Angels" following the recent publication and dissemination of the Book of Enoch in the area.

Research into the Book of Enoch clearly indicates that in Jesus' day and thereafter, it was considered legitimate and used extensively, both by Jews and the Christian movement. And the fact that the Councils of Nicea and subsequent euceminical councils did not choose to include the Book of Enoch does not at all invalidate its pedigree; there were and still are many important books (most particularly the Gospels of Thomas and Philip) whose pedigree is at least as noteworthy as are the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) and, in fact, are also older than some of them... yet were denied admittance into the New Testament.


However... none of this counters the indisputible fact that the Book of Enoch is fatally flawed both historically as well as logically.

The Book of Enoch was written literally thousands of years after the events it pretends to recount. Additionally and most telling of all, the Book of Enoch directly contradicts the Book of Genesis in that Genesis 6:4 praises the descendants of the fallen angels as "mighty men... of old, men of renown" while the Book of Enoch describes them as horrible, blood-thirsty, cannabilistic, giant monsters and blames them directly for "Noah's Flood" ... whereas the Book of Genesis, in additional contradiction, blames their fathers, the Nefilim ("fallen angels").

Additionally, the Book of Enoch contradicts... itself!

While the Book of Enoch states that the fallen angels "...took them wives of all that they chose" and with them raised loving families, it then later describes their progeny as "bastards" and "children of fornication" (?!). Children born into a marriage are most certainly not "bastards" nor "children of fornication."

These two deliberate contradictions with the Book of Genesis together with the thousands of years separating the Book of Enoch from the events it pretends to recount provide the proof needed to invalidate its contents for the anti-Rephaimite propaganda that they truly are.

The sole purpose of the Book of Enoch was and still is to further incite hatred and violence against any and all remaining descendants of the "fallen angels," plain and simple. It brought again to the fore-front the ancient lies previously told... and expanded upon them.

And within the next millennium, those lies would be expanded even further... with these descendants being depicted as blood-sucking "vampires."


- Upir'

Upir-

You would be surprised of the verasity of your commentary;I don't believe the context withing the book of Enoch is fiction. Is a translation of a much older source, misinterpreted in some casings and well interpreted on other. The sons of bastards and fornication are described as that sons of adultery and is a simple passage not a whole overview of the race. As a correlative scenario with many of the kids born from out of marriage relationships. The book as many other books are amogst the widely discarded interpretations of other Babylonian stories, even few that is not out there for the reading. And is being done for a purpose. And as for the last comment I believe you discard things without researching outside the library.

.. I know of them and know a practioner of them.

Then again, I also know a vicar and a priest.

As written, they're as fanciful as much of the old testament. And, who would take them as gospel?

[pardon the pun.. not.]

O dear!, I will remain ignorant to this, is unnecessary to reach for some discussion value when the debate is narrowed and limited to the surface of such subject. Yes I said they were bastard because they were "son of adultery" in the amount of the cases, some of this "angels" as you put them, some came and left, they didn't fell and had broken wings or any literal idealization or confabulous fabrication of such thing, I don't need to scavenge an tainted book to know this- as for i know what it means, much less rely into a plagerized interpretation of Older text translated from babylonian times in regards of the search of the authentic documents of the times which were clay tablets;

"Jared had lived 162 years when he begat Enoch, and after he begat Enoch, he lived 800 years, and begat sons and daughters. All the days of Jared were 962 years. Then he died.
Enoch had lived 65 years when he begat Methuselah, and after he begat Methuselah, Enoch walked with God 300 years, and begat sons and daughters. All the days of Enoch were 365 years. Enoch walked with God. Then he vanished because God took him.
[Genesis 5.18-23]

Took him? This is retaken from the retelling of the king Emmeduranki of Sippar -Sumerian king, as the one men taken from the "Gods", from earth to heaven to discover the mysteries of the universe and return to shed the knowledge with his kingdom, after he vanished with the "Gods" and never returned.

It has been discarded because it brings no importance in the doctrine some Hebrews founded in the fines they intended to extract from the people; people who came from heaven to earth? that had wings? "fallen ones"? mixed with daughters of men? floods? the cleansing? I thought you look pass literacy and jumped to self-conclusions intermixing and educating in external influences. This is not a book to take literal by default, the magic in Angelology/Demonology practice are nothing more than powers of other figures who represents the same in other cultures, just as Zeus is Apolo denomination in different cultures, who is right I would say the name that came before both Greek and Roman nomenclature of such deity, since is the least tainted by cultural impact.

An interesting article I found in regards of the Dead Sea scrolls, and behind that in actuality their is a debate between the biblical scholars and the "conspiracy" theorist scientist and archaeologist; which I believe support far more weight in the authencity of their debate.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/how-toilet-habits-killed-off-dead-sea-scrolls-sect-424344.html

"The Dead Sea Scrolls have been a constant source of fascination since their chance discovery by Bedouin tribesmen in 1947. They provide a rare, if not unique, insight into life and customs around the time of Jesus's life and death. They are also the only Biblical-era documents known to have been written before AD100. In other words, they predate the Gospels.

Just about every aspect of the scrolls has been subject to theorising. While religious scholars have agonised over the question of whether, say, the Scrolls were written by the Essenes themselves or by an Essene splinter group, conspiracy theorists have posited that the Scrolls were somehow fabricated or planted by extra-terrestrials.

One intriguing, but almost entirely unsupported, theory suggests the Catholic Church deliberately suppressed publication of the Scrolls to protect its image of Jesus and his life."

Hmmm, seems that all theories that suggest the "church" deliberately suppressing publications fo the scrolls are readily torn down, proving the point of suppression itself. If there is no longer a church, where is society supposed to look for "faith?" Are they now just supposed to think for themselves without a shepherd to guide them along?

Society would not be able to think for themselves in the long run, it would lead to boredom and boredom always leads to starting drama with a neighbor.

I tend to disagree considering that i myself started off being a Christian but my own viewpoint changed through the years. I decided that since there are too many 'holes' within our own history of religion and probably many mis-translations, then it is probably best for myself to seek my own truth of things. One does NOT have to believe in a God to be fullfilled in life. Not everyone on the Earth seeks religion nor needs of it. Some of us are just fine, peaceful people who live everyday befriending others of many paths of life. Society would just have to find what is more important within themselves and stop depending on a higher source to bring them peace. That can be found within.

I could tell you the collective in religions are mechanization of a social machine that molds a negative and primitive overview of a character, it was not meant to acquire those means and less the closed-mindedness fines, the mistranslations are designed and by this exclusion of books you could see that very evidently. The teachings of prophets are to be taken in personal uplifting and acknowledgement, not to restrict or restrain- this, that and the other in the voice of any "higher power" The only way they could sold this- is by designing planes such as heavens and hell, in the conveyance of making the collective do the right thing out of fear tactics and restrictions of things, which is erroneous, to find harmony is something personal, everyone will find the way at their own pace and lifetimes if required.

I'm glad you found this and posted it.
I'll be checking that book out as well.
Everyone has the right to know of these things and decide for themselves of it.
It's amazing that churches want more patrons, yet when you find out what they hide from us, makes you wonder how trust worthy are they to begin with.
Thanks again for the info.

never read it, but thanks for the link, will look into it