-
Posts
-
, from your replies, I notice you use the question mark “?” as much as I do. We both have questions. So far, no one has taken up my questions, even though my questions are full sentences. Your questions, for example: “Brahma is also constructor of world or cosmic egg?” are statements ending in a question mark. You seem to have many questions, as I do, lol, but yours haven’t been answered either.
But I can tell you are passionate about putting together a who’s-who-puzzle of olden people, olden places and olden records. Correct me if I am wrong about your interests. I apologise to you in advance if I have overstepped and assumed what your interests are on this forum. Unless I have missed the mark, your question marks relate to mine in terms of seeking to construct, so to speak, a whole piece of cloth from the bits and pieces of your knowledge and your understanding of the meaning of what you know. But I am just guessing.
I said it was more challenging to visualize dynamic forces effecting written history. Why? Because systems of writing developed after systems of speech. Speech is invisible. Thoughts are invisible. When two or three people are sharing their thoughts with each other, they inadvertently have formed a dynamic situation which has an invisible, though a felt. force about it. That’s the dynamic force I’m takling about. Speech is a shared activity. Ideas are shared. Writing systems are shared too. Why would a person care about writing something down, if it were not to be shared?
But the earliest writing system, cuniform, was developed about 6,000 years ago more or less in Mesopotamia. Cuneiform was replaced by alphabetic writing sometime after the first century A.D. I looked it up. Languages evolved and over time many have disappeared. Modern languages are either adapting or they are dying out. I remember a manmade language called Esperanto back in the day. It never got a wide acceptance and nothing came of it.
But speech came before writing. Why? Google answers this way: “Humans used the spoken word to express their complex thoughts long before they developed writing systems. Support for this comes from the fact that many languages still exist today without a system of writing, yet no writing system exists without a connection to a spoken language.”
Here’s another question: When was the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament written? “The answer is complicated because the OT is not a single book—it’s a library. In addition, even within that library, the books themselves are not ‘books’ in the modern sense, but composite texts which themselves weave together both oral and written traditions—sometimes gathered together over centuries.”
Can you imagine yourself as a Hebrew priest in exile in Babylon in 586 B.C.? The priests back then wanted to tell their story. Their history. And they wanted the pieces of their who’s-who-puzzle – The Prophets, The Law, and such – in writing. The accomplishment of their masterpiece is not to be dismissed nor discarded. Not at all. But it’s complicated because their story, like the stories of others who wrote down their religious/religion story, with all good intensions to convey their best understandings of themselves, their people, their worldview, their beliefs and their values, could have erred somewhere in the telling. Would they actually and intentionally distort their story to suit their own purposes?
97:7.1 [Part III]The destruction of the Hebrew nation and their captivity in Mesopotamia would have proved of great benefit to their expanding theology had it not been for the determined action of their priesthood. Their nation had fallen before the armies of Babylon, and their nationalistic Yahweh had suffered from the international preachments of the spiritual leaders. It was resentment of the loss of their national god that led the Jewish priests to go to such lengths in the invention of fables and the multiplication of miraculous appearing events in Hebrew history in an effort to restore the Jews as the chosen people of even the new and expanded idea of an internationalized God of all nations.The question mark is there for the reader to think about, not because I don’t know the answer. It is there for the reader to find the answer.
Human history has been shrouded in a veil, but not completely opaque. But I will be brief and use simple language.
Melchizedek and the Kenites were actually of the same origin. They came from MALAKH son of CAINAIN. The house of Kainain its beginning was in the land of Amuru. The first Chaldeans, or Sumerians, were people from Amur. Archaeological evidence confirms this. Who were the Amur people? They were people of Semitic origin, descendants of Arpahxad and his son Jako Kainan and Kayumar. The Archaic Sumerian language was the language of Adam, the Angels also spoke it. It is not true that it was not translated and did not have to be translated for a whole thousand years, this language is kept secret. At the time when God divided the languages and created divisions among mankind, there were certain people who had knowledge of the scriptures. So the language of Adam was not completely lost. Extremely important to them because they had the records of the fallen angels found by CAININ. Records of Fallen Angels is written in this language, no other language existed at the time it was written.
The house of KAINAIN was never a nation, they always enslaved some nation they ruled. In the case of Sumer and Harrap, it was the Kushite peoples who were enslaved. King Nimrod was the son of Semiramis, Semiramis was the twin sister of the god SHAMASH (KAINAIN). in the land of Amur it was the Amorites who were enslaved.
The Kenites (Gypsies) played a very important role in the case of Zion. They are the guardians of the truth. Every time the Hebrews turned to God, it was always the Kenites who turned them back. The greatest prophets from Israel were of Kenite origin, such as Elijah or even King David himself, he came from Obed, his wife was Ruth, she came from the royal family of Moab, so from the family of the sons of Seth (Kenites).
Jehonadab ancestor of Rekabit, his children married into the royal family of Judah. And also with the Levites, especially after the blessing from Yahweh that was given to the Rechabites, which is recorded in Jeremiah. The Rechabites were known as a sect of Nazarenes, who followed the concept of Melchizedek. They were known as Melchizedekians.
GION WIKI
RELIGION WI
Melchisedechian
The Melchisedechians, also known as Athingani (αθίγγανοι athinganoi “intangibles”) were a 9th-century sect of Monarchians located in Phrygia, founded by Theodotus the banker
Another quite distinct sect or party is refuted by Marcus Eremita, who seems to have been a disciple of St. John Chrysostom. His book Eis ton Melchisedek, or according to Photius “Against the Melchisedekites” [1], speaks of these new teachers as making Melchisedech an incarnation of the Logos (divine Word). They were anathematized by the bishops, but would not cease to preach. They seem to have been otherwise orthodox. St. Jerome (Ep. 73) refutes an anonymous work which identified Melchisedech with the Holy Ghost. About A.D. 600, Timotheus, Presbyter of Constantinople, in his book De receptione Haereticorum [2] adds at the end of his list of heretics who need rebaptism the Melchisedechians, “now called Athingani” (Intangibles). They live in Phrygia, and are neither Hebrews nor Gentiles. They keep the Sabbath, but are not circumcised.
The name atsiganoi came to be associated with the Romani people who first appeared in the Byzantine empire at the time.
Login to reply to this topic.
Not registered? Sign up here.