by Jan Erik Sigdell

12 September 2008

received by Email

Spanish version



In a very interesting text: The Anunnaki history and role of Reptilian ETs, Part 1 and Part 2, Sokolov states that Jesus would have been a Yahweh agent, an agent provocateur of the colonial Yahweh power. He is right about “agent provocateur”, but not in the way he thinks.


My studies in the history of Christianity and comparisons between the Old and New Testaments lead to a different picture, which I wish to sketch here. He is also right about the fact that Yahweh and the yahwists are controlling this planet in a very negative way and that the Church is one of their tools, as is to-day’s Christianity - but not the original Christianity!

Let us start with the Old Testament.


I will make it short, but this is all according to what is actually written in the Old Testament (see Bible references at the end of this text [1]). The Hebrews wanted out of Egypt and Yahweh - who I do believe is an Anunnaku (singular of Anunnaki) who wanted to have his own people to work for him as a split-off group (his own faction) and for a power he could gradually extend - saw an opportunity to have his own people here.


He, through Moses, offered to the Hebrews to lead them out to a Promised Land.


But they could have had it easier, since the Pharaoh was willing to let them go, yet Yahweh wanted to demonstrate his power and first have all his 10 plagues come over Egypt. He was eager to show his muscles and hardened the heart of Pharaoh to provoke a fight about the issue. One of the plagues was to go through the land of Egypt and kill all firstborn of men and animals, except among the Hebrews.


As the history in the Bible shows, this wasn’t necessary, but he wanted to have his cruel game as a demonstration of his power.

When they finally came to the Promised Land, people were living there in various towns. Yahweh ordered the Hebrews to slaughter them all and not spare even an old man, a woman or a child - so that they would have,

“…houses full of all good things, which thou filledst not, and wells digged, which thou diggedst not, vineyards and olive trees, which thou plantedst not”.

(Deut. 6,11)

When the inhabitants of a town wanted to negotiate, he again hardened their hearts to force the conflict he wanted to have as an excuse to make the Hebrews kill them all. Occasionally only virgins were spared and caught as booty, and it would be naïve to believe that it wouldn’t be for sexual “services”.


These murderous robbing raids were a veritable holocaust!

Now Yahweh had his people. He was cruel, selfish and revenging and severely punishing when it didn’t follow. The text in the Old Testament doesn’t indicate that he knew what real love is, but he rather loved fight and bloodshed.

Now we jump to the time 2000 years ago. Jesus was born, an incarnation of Christ. Christ is actually not a name but a designation, but we don’t know a real name for him. Jesus was the name he was given after incarnating. He began teaching and preaching in the Promised Land and with time attracted lots of people. What he said and did was upsetting Yahweh, since he told things that Yahweh’s people shouldn’t know.


His message was revolutionary and he revealed secrets. Slowly, bit by bit. He talked about a love that Yahweh despised. He talked about his “Father” in terms which gave a picture very different from the one of Yahweh.


The “Father” is loving, caring, benevolent, forgiving, contrary to the qualities of Yahweh. So the one Jesus talked about clearly wasn’t Yahweh.


John 8,31-44 reflects this in Jesus’ speech to the Jews:

8:38 - “I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.”
8:42 - “Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.”
8:44 - “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.”

So Jesus actually was an agent provocateur, but against Yahweh!

Yahweh felt threatened by this man and wanted him killed. He influenced the mind of the high priest Caiaphas to have Jesus crucified like a criminal, hoping that the new teachings would after his death become forgotten. But the contrary occurred. The murder of Jesus gave more power to the movement he had started and it continued growing. Yahweh was very concerned about this.

The first Christians were what theology calls “Christian Jews”, a bit depreciatingly as if they would not have been real Christians. But they were, of course, the most christian Christians that have ever been, since they were the closest to Jesus himself. Out of them grew the Gnostic Christianity.


The latter declared that Yahweh (who they also called Yaldabaoth) wasn’t a real god, but a demiurge, a secondary god, himself created by the highest God and prime creator - a fact that Yahweh didn’t want to be known. He wanted to be regarded as the prime creator himself.

In this situation, Yahweh developed a sinister but clever plan. He wanted to infiltrate this new movement and twist it his own ways so that it would instead serve his own purposes. One of his agents was Paul, who first as Saul had persecuted Christians. Which Christians? Obviously the Christian Jews and the Gnostic Christians, since there yet were no other. Yahweh gave him a vision and made him believe to experience Christ, and Saul became Paul, who converted and began to preach Christianity.


But which Christianity? Not the one he had before fought against, but his own modified and falsified version the way Yahweh wanted to have it.

In the year 325 AD the emperor Constantine with the council of Nicaea created the foundation for the Church as it is to day. His intention was to selfishly use this Church as a tool for his power and he obviously was an unknowing agent of Yahweh. At the council, the Gnostic Christians were muzzled and were not allowed to speak.


The emperor gave their petitions unopened to the fire. They were at the end declared to be heretics. This was the beginning of the end of Gnostic Christianity. Instead a yahwistic Church was formed, which claimed to adhere to Jesus Christ, but not the true one. So we since have two Christs: the false one of the Church and the true one who had once incarnated as Jesus.

So who is Christ? I believe that he is a kind of personification of the love of the prime creator and that he was sent by those who intend to save the Earth from the grip of negative extraterrestrials.


And who, then, is Yahweh? In the latter decades remarkably interesting discoveries were made in the research into the history of religions, based on archeological findings in Israel. In the original Hebrew religion (or Pre-Hebrew religion) the highest god was ’El Elyon' [2]. He had 70 sons and one of them was Yahweh.


Yahweh had a consort ’Asherah,' a goddess.


Her name is found around 40 times in the Hebrew text of the Bible, but it is always translated as “tree” or “grove” in order to obscure the real meaning, since her symbol is a vertical pole or a tree. At about the time of the exodus from Egypt, and still more during the time of the Babylonian captivity, the religion was made monotheistic and one shouldn’t know of the others, not even of ’Asherah.


When the Bible states that it is forbidden to plant a tree at the altar of Yahweh (Deut. 16,21), the real meaning is that it is forbidden to put a symbol (or maybe even image) of ’Asherahp' at the altar (and what sense would it have to forbid planting a tree there?).

Yahweh was considered a warrior and weather god from Sinai, where the Anunnaki had their center…

The polytheistic origin is reflected in the Bible’s creation story, which will no doubt have its origin in the one given in the texts on the clay plates of Sumeria and Babylon.


The first sentence in the Bible (Gen. 1,1) reads:

Bereshit bara ’Elohim et ha shamayim v-et ha arez”, translated as “In the beginning God created the heaven and the Earth.”

Now it has always been a problem swept under the carpet that ’Elohim' is plural and literally means “gods”.


Therefore, some want to understand it as:

“In the beginning the gods created the heaven and the Earth”, which doesn’t fit grammatically, since the verb bara is in singular.

However, the first word bereshit can not only be translated as “beginning”, but also as “the first one” - the one who was in the beginning.


Now we can correctly (no grammatical problem anymore) translate as,

“The First One created the gods, the heavens and the Earth”! (Shamajim is also plural and actually means “heavens” - or other cosmic worlds?)

Yahweh is in the Hebrew Bible text usually mentioned as “Yahweh Elohim”, which seems to indicate that he is one of the created ’Elohim. The plural repeats in other passages:

“WE will create humans in OUR image” and so on, still swept under the carpet and declared to be pluralis majestatis, a white lie in a dilemma…

Sitchin’s sympathy for Yahweh is logical. He is a Jew - I respect him sincerely as such - and must have this sympathy, or he would face heavy criticism from his own people, regarded as a black sheep, would he describe it differently. His conclusion that Yahweh would be the god of the Anunnaki [3] cannot be taken very seriously.

So who, then, is The First One?

Like Sokolov I am generally skeptic about “channeled” messages, since it is hard to separate the chaff from the wheat and there will be a lot more chaff than wheat.


But there is one book I feel is quite pure wheat: Bringers of the Dawn, by Barbara Marciniak (channelings from the Pleiadians) [4].


The Pleiadians talk about a “prime creator” who has created all in the beginning, out of which secondary creations were later made. The Prime Creator created the Pleiadians, the Anunnaki, and so on. In the message Anunnaki are called “lizzies” since they are said to originally be reptilian by nature. They are not very positive beings, but “uninformed”, wherefore they create “uninformed systems”.


In a struggle about the Earth they took control over it a very long time ago.


The time for our liberation is slowly approaching, and the Pleiadians say that they are helping us, but that in the meantime the control by the Anunnaki will become much more subtle and sophisticated and therefore more mean. Even though many of them are quite negative, not all of them are.

Enûma Elish, the Sumerian-Babylonian creation epic, has something important in its beginning, which Sitchin doesn’t elaborate. First there were Apsû and Tiâmat, a divine prime creator pair, who created all [5].


They also created the Anunnaki, who became some kind of “celestial rowdies” and disturbed the order in the creation. Therefore, Apsû wanted to reverse their creation so that they should no more exist. Tiâmat, however, opposed this, since they were her children. Ea (Enki) then killed Apsû and later Marduk killed Tiâmat, the original mother of all gods. This is a very sinister act but in the texts Marduk is made a hero and Tiâmat a monster… Obviously this is a biased view that reverses the question of good and evil!


But can you kill the prime creators? Of course not!


The meaning of this can only be that the Anunnaki split off from them and wanted to be independent, as if they were dead. And to the Anunnaki they became effectively dead… This, again, gives a negative impression of the Anunnaki. They, like Yahweh, wanted to be regarded as the real creators and we should not know about those who created them.

So there is quite a bit of wrongdoing to be associated with Marduk, after all…

Sitchin in the celestial fight between Marduk and Tiâmat sees a fight between the populations of two planets on a collision course in order to avoid a catastrophe. The Anunnaki succeeded in destroying the other planet in order to save themselves. But this will be only one aspect of the whole thing. Tiâmat is certainly not only a planet, but a highest prime-creator goddess, whose special planet in our solar system was the one that was destroyed.


This planet is called Phaeton (or Mallona). A part of it according to Enûma Elish became the Earth and the rest became the asteroid belt. It can be assumed that a part of the population of Phaeton (Tiâmat’s people) survived. Some could save themselves to Mars, where with time that civilization died, and another part to the Earth (or they survived on the part that became the Earth).

So did the Anunnaki really create us? No! They modified life on our planet through genetic manipulation.


There could very well have been earlier civilizations on Earth before that, which either disappeared or were also genetically manipulated. For the control of the Earth, people should be kept in the dark, be unknowing and not “eat from the tree of knowledge”. Earlier and higher developed civilizations wouldn’t be tolerated, anymore.


When the “Watchers” (the sons of the Elohim) acted against the laws of the Anunnaki and brought new genes in the Earth population (Gen. 6) - a kind of compassionate development aid! - they were punished and the “giants” which were born out of it, with qualities and capacities Earth people were not allowed to have, were killed in the flood.

By the way: the “Tree of Knowledge” can not have anything to do with sex, as I have explained in detail in "On sexuality and the Bible".

So have earlier civilizations only known extraterrestrials as “gods”, or have they also known real gods - non-physical entities like Apsû and Tiâmat, which the Sumerian-Babylonic scriptures do mention?


The Prime Creator will be one!


In India, Brahma is known as the highest god. I think it is “materializing” things a bit too much to state that there would be no non-physical entities that really are and were what we would call gods, and that there is no highest one who created all. After all, the question unavoidably arises: who created the extraterrestrials regarded as gods? Following this question back will at the end have to lead to an immaterial prime creator…

There will in the beginning also have been other extraterrestrials, who contacted, taught and led Earth people. Quetzalcoatl and Viracocha must not have been Anunnaki.


Regression experiences with persons, who once lived in Atlantis, indicated that extraterrestrials were in contact with the Atlanteans and gave them knowledge, but withdrew disappointed when they saw it abused.

  • Why did the yahwists eradicate such civilizations as those in what is to day Latin America?

  • Probably because they saw them as competitive - competitive Anunnaki factions or competitive extraterrestrial civilizations?

  • The extraterrestrial “gods” will be multidimensional beings - who knows, maybe five-dimensional?

Therefore they can make themselves invisible to us and shape-shift in ways non-understandable in a three-dimensional world concept.


That is probably also a reason why we were genetically engineered to be able to perceive and think only in three dimensions and have but a three-dimensional consciousness, lest we would know too much... To want more would be to “eat” from the forbidden “tree of knowledge”.

So I cannot regard the Anunnaki as my creators, but only as manipulators of an existing creation. My ancestors very, very far back were “created” that way - but not me! However, my immortal soul which incarnates in one body after the other is created, not by the Anunnaki but by the Prime Creator.

It seems that Yahweh, when he had twisted Christianity, to be on the safe side also established Islam. Yahweh and Allah will be the same.


Thus he could play the two out against each other in the Machiavellian sense of “divide and rule”. (“Allah” is, by the way, not derived from ’El = “god, since “al” is the article in Arabic; “lah” means “god” and “al lah” simply means “the god”).

Sokolov's question if 'Ai could have something to do with a tunnel system, through which Abraham moved, has to be answered with “No”. 'Ai was the name of a town and the word means “heap of ruins”.

His theory about the barbaric “minicastration” through circumcision is very interesting. Sitchin discusses this in his book Divine Encounters and claims that one thereby puts the “sign of the stars” in the flesh [6]. The Hebrew word for circumcision is mul. Could that be associated with the Sumerian MUL.MUL = the Pleiades? This appears doubtful in view of the messages from the Pleiades (see above).


Sokolov writes “mulmul, our solar system” as it is “called in the ancient texts”. That could make more sense.


In which ancient texts is that written?

Some extraterrestrials seem to be very long-living, almost immortal.

  • Maybe they rejuvenate through feeding on our life energies?

  • Is that one thing they wanted to have us for?

As multidimensional beings they can easily take energies from us without our knowing.


They seem to love bloodsheds, like Yahweh in the Old Testament. When a person is killed, he dies full of life energy that can be “extracted” from the dying or just dead body.


But if someone dies old or sick, his “batteries” are weak or empty and there isn’t much energy to take.

  • Is that why they love bloodsheds?

  • Is that the real sense behind sacrifice of animals and humans?

  • Is that why one shouldn’t eat blood but let animals bleed to death, so that the life energy in the blood becomes available for the gods?

  • Is that why the yahwists introduced sexual bigotry so that sexual energies would become more easily accessible to the gods?

These things and others will be described in much more detail in my forthcoming book in German: Es begann in Babylon (“It began in Babylon”).





  1. A choice of the many cruelties in the Old Testament: Gen.: 34,25-29; Ex.: 12,12; 12,29-30; 15,3; 32,26-28; Lev.: 26,7-8; 26,21-22; 26,26-29; Num.: 15,32-36; 16,29-35; 16,46-49; 21,3-6; 21,24-25; 21,33-35; 31,7-10; 31,14-18; 31,31-32; 31,35; Deut: 2,32-34;. 3,1-6; 7,2-3; 9,35 13,9-10; 13,14-16; 20,10-17; 21,11-14; Joshua: 6,20-25; 8,2; 8,21-25; 8,29; 10,10-11; 10,17-40; 11,6-22 ; Judges: 1,4-11; 1,17; 1,25; 3,29-31; 4,14-16; 7,15-25; 8,17; 9,4-5; 9,43-45; 9,49-52; 11,30-40; 15,15-16; 18,27; 19,22-29; 20,2; 20,31-37; 20,41-48; 1 Samuel: 5,8-9; 6,19; 11,6-11; 15,3-9; 15,33; 18,7; 30,17; 2 Samuel: 5,8; 5,25; 8,1-5; 10,18; 12,31; 18,6-7; 24,10-16; 1 Kings: 20,28-30; 2 Kings: 1,9-14; 2,23-25; 5,25-27; 6,18; 10,13-25; 14,5-7; 15,16; 19,35; 1 Chron.: 20,2-3; Psalms: 137,9; Iesaiah: 13,15-18; 45,5-7; 49,25-26; Jeremiah 16,3-5; Lament.: 4,9-11; Ezekiel: 6,12-13; 9,3-6; Hosea: 13,15; 14,1.

  2. Ein Gott allein? JHWH-Verehrung und biblischer Monotheismus im Kontext der israelitischen und altorientalischen Religionsgeschichte, 13th Colloquium of the Swiss Academy of Religious and Social Sciences, ed. by Walter Dietrich and Martin A. Klopfenstein, Universitätsverlag, Freiburg (Switzerland), 1994 (several contributions in this valuable book are in English).

  3. Zecharia Sitchin: Divine Encounters, 1995.

  4. Barbara Marciniak: Bringers of the Dawn, 1992

  5. Alexander Heidel: The Babylonian Genesis, 2nd ed., University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1960.

  6. Zecharia Sitchin: Divine Encounters, 1995, p. 311.