a reply to:
DISRAELI2
a reply to:
TheValeyard
If you are looking at Sumeria, you are talking up to 5,000 BC
If you are looking at something like Göbekli Tepe in Turkey, you are talking around 12,000 BCE
The Madjedbebe archeological site in Northern Territory, Australia uncovered stone axes with sharpened polished edges, stone spear tips, seed-grinding
tools (mortars and pestles) that are somewhere between 50,000 - 75,000 years old
Homo sapien remains found in Australia (like the Mungo man) are around 50,000 years old
But homo sapien remains have been found all around the world, that are up to 300,000 years old
My point is ...
You are either trying to examine the origin of the species ...
Or the geographical lineage of named places and countries (Biblical or otherwise)
You cannot do both
They cannot be aligned in this way, there is simply to much time, missing pieces, and geological variables in-between
Linking ancient writings geographically, is at best, correlating places named after information passed down in written and spoken traditions. Not the
places written or spoken of themselves
You are trying to put together a puzzle using the two edges, without any of the pieces in-between
I admire the time and effort you put into your research, but it doesn't work like that
Regardless, you are analysing veil texts, which are supposed to be metaphors for processes of creation, as if they are historically accurate places
and people
Adam is Atom
Torah is Torus (the geometric shape)
Elohim is equilibrium
Flood myths talk about the formation and filling of a cell (torus/sphere)
The filling of any forming cell, working in the same was as the Earth itself was formed
With the internal waters (from which all matter and solid land are formed), seperating the cell from the upper waters, being the atmosphere
It is no different to the seed and it's shell
Or the mythological references to the "egg" or "turtle" of creation
I really do respect the amount of time and effort you put into your research DISRAELI ...
But I don't understand why you don't use that same effort to correlate the ancient texts to complex non-linear dynamics such as the underlying
principles of creation, dimensions, shapes, forces and physics. Rather than linear dynamics of things like history
History can be misrepresented, mistranslated and misunderstood. Especially when written in allegory
The cycles of creation inherent within any level of form of torus, cannot
You are supposed to look at the coding within the Biblical text as being to the Earth, like the coding of DNA is to our bodies
The patterns of history form to the original writings of the texts, not the other way around
When you understand this, you realise that it does not matter which mythology, religion or "coded texts" you analyse, they are all inherent to the
same cycles of propagation
Which is why we see the same stories, from mythology to mythology, religion to religion
You also realise, that the historical accuracy of texts is irrelevant to the intended understanding within the texts
If Jesus did exist, it is just as likely the he came to exist because of the "coding" of the world, such as the Biblical texts ...
As it is, the texts came to be rewritten of someone who fulfills a cycle of probability
One of the very first things the Sinai (physical orbs of light) taught me within Illumination, for understanding the source material for things like
the Bible, is that:
"You need to consider them "cyclically"
"They need to be considered "Cyclically"
See what I did there?
Jesus Christ came about, because of the texts which proceeded him
Just as much as versions of the text came to be rewritten, because he proceeded them
CHRIST = CYCLE
JESUS / ISIS = RESONANCE
The filling and fulfillment of the cycle
The physics of which, is not different to someone passing on a cross, to rise again
Someone who has been before, and will be again
A cycle which also extends to the concept of its "anti", which needs be, in-between, in order for something that once was, to then "come again"
Though we perceive the things we were use to contextualised the cycles linearly, it is for the most part pointless analysing things like creation and
the nature of "God" in this way
The personification, regardless of whether they historically existed or not, is there to help you understand principles about the cycles of
creation
edit on 11 5 24 by Compendium because: Missing word and context added