There is very little information here beyond the basic ‘Celtic trade routes existed before Rome’. First it is necessary to give a quick review of what ‘Celtic’ means as it was not a centralised culture. Next give the key trading centres, including ports. It is inexcusable that shipping is not mentioned here as it was faster and safer. The routes both land and water between main points of exchange call for a map. Finally give specific trade goods, examples, which apply to the different routes. Add some illustrative items like archaeo finds to make it come alive.
Like Rick D. I was puzzled why the article speaks exclusvely of male bull leapers when the frescoes show both females and males.
Secondly the whole analysis seems infected by the custom of Spanish bullfighting. This is a debased form of the bull tradition. The Cretan culture is an art better understood as a dance. The Spanish bull is deliberately infuriated by the flapping of a cloak, and thrown barbs. None of this appears in Crete. The Cretan event could well have been with bulls reared closely familiar with human contact, even trained to permit the leaps and acrobatics. The intimacy of the art could then be observed and the skills assessed and enjoyed like watching a dance. As so often crude ideas of violence and competition get in the way of a fascinating art form.
Leo Rutherford’s defnition given early in the article represents a regrettbly common distortion of shamanism in the West. It applies the same approach as Western (and Christan) political economy. The Western (man) seeks to control and exploit. If shamanism truly operates within nature and the whole reality (the Web) then the shaman works as a partner. The ally – plant, animal, spirit – is asked for help. This may be part of an existing partnership or a new one. The ritual trappings are about making oneself acceptable and respectful. In return for their help they will ask for certain services such as sacrificing meat or sex or alcohol or violence or many other things. They may ask for constant use of a colour, hairstyle, wearing a symbol. They may ask for active work for a social / animal need. Whatever it is, there is an exchange, the ally’s help is given and our help is given in return. To talk of ‘controlling’ a spirit is a childish fantasy like Aladdin.
"The statues are believed to have had religious or ritual significance."
That's a bit like excavating a mosaic of Christ and saying that may have had religious significance.
Come on. This is Baphomet, Ba'al and Lucifer/Satan worship. Given the number of successful historians and archaeologists who worship thus today, the chance that this is not well understood is zero.
Firstly, it should be pointed out that ALL of the ancient peoples derived their myths from astrological lore. Christianity was no different. In addition, such astrological lore was embedded in “tales” that were actually historically based.
One good example is the Epic of Gilgamesh, where Gilgamesh has to fight the “bull of heaven” – obviously a reference to Taurus. To defeat it, he has to strike its weak spoit on its shoulder – which would be where the Pleiades are.
Why is this? **Because Gilgamesh was attacking Akkad to the north, a people symbolized by the constellation of Taurus, and their “weak spot” was a defensive cluster of cities symbolized by the Pleiades**.
What was the point of Jesus actually fulfilling the practice of “ocean-walking” as Orion represented? Because of the symbolism of Orion. Orion has an uplifted arm that ancient Egypt represented as holding a mace-head, **symbolizing the rightful, divine ruler of Egypt**.
Moreover, Orion is seen as the “gateway” to the “otherworld” – specifically through the Pleiades (cf. Rev. 1:16-20). Orion represents God in His role as divine King of the universe, and the seven stars represent the Watchers over His chosen people (cf. Amos 5:8 and Zech. 4:10).
Orion – as Jesus Christ, the Angel of the Lord – is also seen in Rev. 10:1-7, especially verse 2, **standing on both the sea and the dry land**.
In the text, the miracle of Jesus’ water-walking is directly connected to the miracle of the loaves and fishes, and is intended to demonstrate a specific point in terms of faith. It’s also highly symbolic on many levels, not JUST demonstrating Jesus’ divine kingship. The miracle of the loaves and fishes symbolically represents that the “harvest” of faith will be greater broken, than whole. Israel as a nation was “broken” by the division between northern Israel and Judah (see 1 Kings 12). But that division and scattering would eventually reap a much greater harvest (see Hosea 1:9-11).
The water-walking is directly connected to that, because Orion “walks” upon the water constellations **representing nations and empires that have had control over Israel, and scattered her**.
Did Jesus literally walk on water? Yes, and not just to prove a point to be faithful. It had a MUCH deeper meaning.
Sorry, I don’t buy it. This theory makes no sense at all. The fact that he had his whole kit with him and nothing that we know of was taken, and the wounds on his hand and body, more than likely indicate a fight and turf war over resources.
Sometimes, the simpliest explanation is the correct one and no amount of scientific contrivances can change this.
This is a much more credible explanation. Human sacrifice would explain the presence of the copper axe, which otherwise would be like driving a Ferrari to a burglary and leaving it behind.
People don't like to think about things like human sacrifice. It has been a constant of the human condition for a very long time and is still very much with us today, no matter how most might like to think otherwise. A lot of trouble is gone to in order to perform such ceremonies. Climbing up high into the Alps would have been part of the religious importance of the occasion to those performing it.
Christianity gets a bad rap constantly these days. However, it was true Christianity which sent these evil practices underground, in a manner of speaking, and it is those behind such practices today that are responsible for the undeservedly bad reputation which true Christianity attracts.
There are, no doubt, quite a few who would have understood that Oetzi was a sacrificial victim all along, because they do similar things today, although usually with younger victims. If that seems an exaggeration, Halloween was just a few days ago. The Celtic day of the dead is not dead. It is very much alive.
It is the average person who is dead, in a sense. Dead, that is, to the awful truth.
Does inbreeding amongst extreme elites still occur?
Yes. It does. They're just more careful how they do it.
When you regard yourselves as superior to mankind, just like the Pharaohs did, unnatural inbreeding comes rather naturally. And people don't change all that much.
Personally, no matter which of the four gospels I read, despite the different writing styles, the sense of who Jesus was comes across as essentially the same. Jesus in Mark is the same person as Jesus in John or Matthew or Luke. Each of them is describing the same vibrant, warm, individual.
In reading this book, it immediately felt off. For example, there will be a sentence or phrase closely resembling something from, say, the sermon on the mount, but the very next line sounds like a completely different personality produced it.
To me, this comes across as someone interspersing things that did come from Jesus to hook you and get you to accept the writer’s insertions as if they came from him, too.
It is hard to know what is truth and what isn't, regarding the Templars. The waters have been muddied by popular authors, the Vatican and the Freemasons, which has suited some people very well.
It is worth remembering one thing, however. Hegel never invented his infamous dialectic. He merely gave his name to a time-honoured, yet dishonourable practice.
The victims of the Middle Eastern turmoil were the pawns, such as they are today, as is true Christianity.
The Hegelian dialectic is a successful strategy because so many take things at face value.
Indeed, the average person is like a young woman who has grown distrustful of her boyfriend, but agrees to have dinner with him to talk things through rather than simply dump him. As she alights her vehicle near the restaurant, an assailant grabs her. Fearing for her life, she is saved by the arrival of her boyfriend, who sees off the threat with little regard for his own safety.
After such an heroic action, she gladly accepts him as genuine.
But was what she experienced real? Or was it simply an exercise in further mind control orchestrated by a man she was beginning to seriously doubt?
Ultimately, people believe what they want to believe and some of those that know this prey upon it.
Many conspiracy theorists understand this happens, but still fall for it constantly. And they're supposedly the aware ones. The unaware don't even realise it happens.
Another example (the most famous been the tower of Pisa) of how an engineering mistake became a tourists’ attraction. Some more are the 17th ce. Swedish ship Vasa, the Spruce Goose airplane of Hughes Aircraft, the crooked spire in the Chesterfield Parish Church England, the Garisenda Tower in Bologna etc.
This is an interesting proposition. However, the sayings of these texts do not ring true, on the whole.
Gnosticism is an agenda pushed ultimately by those wishing to discredit Christianity. Even the use of the word itself, 'Gnostic', can be a deception. All Christians are truly 'Gnostic' in that they believe it is possible to know God, as opposed to Agnostic. These sayings will only make it harder for one to truly know God.
Muddying the waters of Christianity is a favourite past-time of devotees of the Devil.
After reading several of the comments I wanted to clarify that the Assyrian account wanted to kill the god who sent the flood. in the biblical account Gilgamesh or referred to as Nimrod was a rebel against God and a mighty warrior. The name Nimrod means to rebel against God.
As far as what I've seen of all the other ones with a similar biblical flood account the God who sent the flood was to kill the wicked. The only one that differs from that is the story of Gilgamesh. so I put those two together or all the other ones against the Gilgamesh retelling and you can see the perspective of what's being told. Also Babylon is not referred to in the Bible is necessarily a location, but a particular type of empire. As Babylon is also existing or reemerging in prophecies that are yet fulfilled. Rome was also considered one of these empires and when the stone was thrown at the feet made of clay and iron and destroyed it to never unite again it was the destruction of the Roman Empire. Jesus Christ was the stone that was not cut with human hands. Babylon reemerges and is destroyed in a day during the time of the Beast.
God was not angry at the people for building the tower of babel. it was the technology or the ability of what they would be able to create if they stayed there they would quickly turn wicked again so they he had to separate them or they would quickly turn self-destructive and self dependent to repeat what he did that brought about the flood.
“And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.” Genesis 11:5-9 KJV Not a KJV only.
when people lose dependency on God they become self-destructive and start bragging on themselves and or believe they are one. Plenty of history to say that. Nimrod means rebell against God. they didn't wanna scatter across the earth and God told him to scatter. The scattering created the nations. From there he chose a nation and not a strong one to show his power.
Please correct the article to show that it was not God’s anger that sent them but to save them. Confusing their language slowed down this process. as we can rapidly see what's happening as people are unifying on a global scale and it is self-destructive. Some benefits, but on the whole and the trajectory it's going is self-destructive.
Here you can navigate quickly through all comments made in any article sorted by date/time.
There is very little information here beyond the basic ‘Celtic trade routes existed before Rome’. First it is necessary to give a quick review of what ‘Celtic’ means as it was not a centralised culture. Next give the key trading centres, including ports. It is inexcusable that shipping is not mentioned here as it was faster and safer. The routes both land and water between main points of exchange call for a map. Finally give specific trade goods, examples, which apply to the different routes. Add some illustrative items like archaeo finds to make it come alive.
Like Rick D. I was puzzled why the article speaks exclusvely of male bull leapers when the frescoes show both females and males.
Secondly the whole analysis seems infected by the custom of Spanish bullfighting. This is a debased form of the bull tradition. The Cretan culture is an art better understood as a dance. The Spanish bull is deliberately infuriated by the flapping of a cloak, and thrown barbs. None of this appears in Crete. The Cretan event could well have been with bulls reared closely familiar with human contact, even trained to permit the leaps and acrobatics. The intimacy of the art could then be observed and the skills assessed and enjoyed like watching a dance. As so often crude ideas of violence and competition get in the way of a fascinating art form.
Leo Rutherford’s defnition given early in the article represents a regrettbly common distortion of shamanism in the West. It applies the same approach as Western (and Christan) political economy. The Western (man) seeks to control and exploit.
If shamanism truly operates within nature and the whole reality (the Web) then the shaman works as a partner. The ally – plant, animal, spirit – is asked for help. This may be part of an existing partnership or a new one. The ritual trappings are about making oneself acceptable and respectful. In return for their help they will ask for certain services such as sacrificing meat or sex or alcohol or violence or many other things. They may ask for constant use of a colour, hairstyle, wearing a symbol. They may ask for active work for a social / animal need.
Whatever it is, there is an exchange, the ally’s help is given and our help is given in return. To talk of ‘controlling’ a spirit is a childish fantasy like Aladdin.
Reinforcing the patriarchy with phalluses for protection. There’s a chuckle in there while writing this.
Reinforcing the patriarchy with phalluses for protection. There’s a chuckle in there while writing this.
Reinforcing the patriarchy with phalluses for protection. There’s a chuckle in there while writing this.
"The statues are believed to have had religious or ritual significance."
That's a bit like excavating a mosaic of Christ and saying that may have had religious significance.
Come on. This is Baphomet, Ba'al and Lucifer/Satan worship. Given the number of successful historians and archaeologists who worship thus today, the chance that this is not well understood is zero.
They just may not want to admit it.
These are stunning artifacts. The Sumerians were such an advanced civilization. Imagine what’s left to discover.
Those Roman shoes compared to the Addidas ones… just goes to show you, NOTHING today is original. XD
Firstly, it should be pointed out that ALL of the ancient peoples derived their myths from astrological lore. Christianity was no different. In addition, such astrological lore was embedded in “tales” that were actually historically based.
One good example is the Epic of Gilgamesh, where Gilgamesh has to fight the “bull of heaven” – obviously a reference to Taurus. To defeat it, he has to strike its weak spoit on its shoulder – which would be where the Pleiades are.
Why is this? **Because Gilgamesh was attacking Akkad to the north, a people symbolized by the constellation of Taurus, and their “weak spot” was a defensive cluster of cities symbolized by the Pleiades**.
What was the point of Jesus actually fulfilling the practice of “ocean-walking” as Orion represented? Because of the symbolism of Orion. Orion has an uplifted arm that ancient Egypt represented as holding a mace-head, **symbolizing the rightful, divine ruler of Egypt**.
Moreover, Orion is seen as the “gateway” to the “otherworld” – specifically through the Pleiades (cf. Rev. 1:16-20). Orion represents God in His role as divine King of the universe, and the seven stars represent the Watchers over His chosen people (cf. Amos 5:8 and Zech. 4:10).
Orion – as Jesus Christ, the Angel of the Lord – is also seen in Rev. 10:1-7, especially verse 2, **standing on both the sea and the dry land**.
In the text, the miracle of Jesus’ water-walking is directly connected to the miracle of the loaves and fishes, and is intended to demonstrate a specific point in terms of faith. It’s also highly symbolic on many levels, not JUST demonstrating Jesus’ divine kingship. The miracle of the loaves and fishes symbolically represents that the “harvest” of faith will be greater broken, than whole. Israel as a nation was “broken” by the division between northern Israel and Judah (see 1 Kings 12). But that division and scattering would eventually reap a much greater harvest (see Hosea 1:9-11).
The water-walking is directly connected to that, because Orion “walks” upon the water constellations **representing nations and empires that have had control over Israel, and scattered her**.
Did Jesus literally walk on water? Yes, and not just to prove a point to be faithful. It had a MUCH deeper meaning.
Sorry, I don’t buy it. This theory makes no sense at all. The fact that he had his whole kit with him and nothing that we know of was taken, and the wounds on his hand and body, more than likely indicate a fight and turf war over resources.
Sometimes, the simpliest explanation is the correct one and no amount of scientific contrivances can change this.
This is a much more credible explanation. Human sacrifice would explain the presence of the copper axe, which otherwise would be like driving a Ferrari to a burglary and leaving it behind.
People don't like to think about things like human sacrifice. It has been a constant of the human condition for a very long time and is still very much with us today, no matter how most might like to think otherwise. A lot of trouble is gone to in order to perform such ceremonies. Climbing up high into the Alps would have been part of the religious importance of the occasion to those performing it.
Christianity gets a bad rap constantly these days. However, it was true Christianity which sent these evil practices underground, in a manner of speaking, and it is those behind such practices today that are responsible for the undeservedly bad reputation which true Christianity attracts.
There are, no doubt, quite a few who would have understood that Oetzi was a sacrificial victim all along, because they do similar things today, although usually with younger victims. If that seems an exaggeration, Halloween was just a few days ago. The Celtic day of the dead is not dead. It is very much alive.
It is the average person who is dead, in a sense. Dead, that is, to the awful truth.
Does inbreeding amongst extreme elites still occur?
Yes. It does. They're just more careful how they do it.
When you regard yourselves as superior to mankind, just like the Pharaohs did, unnatural inbreeding comes rather naturally. And people don't change all that much.
Personally, no matter which of the four gospels I read, despite the different writing styles, the sense of who Jesus was comes across as essentially the same. Jesus in Mark is the same person as Jesus in John or Matthew or Luke. Each of them is describing the same vibrant, warm, individual.
In reading this book, it immediately felt off. For example, there will be a sentence or phrase closely resembling something from, say, the sermon on the mount, but the very next line sounds like a completely different personality produced it.
To me, this comes across as someone interspersing things that did come from Jesus to hook you and get you to accept the writer’s insertions as if they came from him, too.
It is hard to know what is truth and what isn't, regarding the Templars. The waters have been muddied by popular authors, the Vatican and the Freemasons, which has suited some people very well.
It is worth remembering one thing, however. Hegel never invented his infamous dialectic. He merely gave his name to a time-honoured, yet dishonourable practice.
The victims of the Middle Eastern turmoil were the pawns, such as they are today, as is true Christianity.
The Hegelian dialectic is a successful strategy because so many take things at face value.
Indeed, the average person is like a young woman who has grown distrustful of her boyfriend, but agrees to have dinner with him to talk things through rather than simply dump him. As she alights her vehicle near the restaurant, an assailant grabs her. Fearing for her life, she is saved by the arrival of her boyfriend, who sees off the threat with little regard for his own safety.
After such an heroic action, she gladly accepts him as genuine.
But was what she experienced real? Or was it simply an exercise in further mind control orchestrated by a man she was beginning to seriously doubt?
Ultimately, people believe what they want to believe and some of those that know this prey upon it.
Many conspiracy theorists understand this happens, but still fall for it constantly. And they're supposedly the aware ones. The unaware don't even realise it happens.
Another example (the most famous been the tower of Pisa) of how an engineering mistake became a tourists’ attraction. Some more are the 17th ce. Swedish ship Vasa, the Spruce Goose airplane of Hughes Aircraft, the crooked spire in the Chesterfield Parish Church England, the Garisenda Tower in Bologna etc.
https://www.amazon.com/Hamlets-Mill-Investigating-Knowledge-Transmission/dp/0879232153/
I just placed an order and can't wait for the goods to arrive
This is an interesting proposition. However, the sayings of these texts do not ring true, on the whole.
Gnosticism is an agenda pushed ultimately by those wishing to discredit Christianity. Even the use of the word itself, 'Gnostic', can be a deception. All Christians are truly 'Gnostic' in that they believe it is possible to know God, as opposed to Agnostic. These sayings will only make it harder for one to truly know God.
Muddying the waters of Christianity is a favourite past-time of devotees of the Devil.
After reading several of the comments I wanted to clarify that the Assyrian account wanted to kill the god who sent the flood.
in the biblical account Gilgamesh or referred to as Nimrod was a rebel against God and a mighty warrior.
The name Nimrod means to rebel against God.
As far as what I've seen of all the other ones with a similar biblical flood account the God who sent the flood was to kill the wicked.
The only one that differs from that is the story of Gilgamesh.
so I put those two together or all the other ones against the Gilgamesh retelling and you can see the perspective of what's being told.
Also Babylon is not referred to in the Bible is necessarily a location, but a particular type of empire. As Babylon is also existing or reemerging in prophecies that are yet fulfilled.
Rome was also considered one of these empires and when the stone was thrown at the feet made of clay and iron and destroyed it to never unite again it was the destruction of the Roman Empire. Jesus Christ was the stone that was not cut with human hands. Babylon reemerges and is destroyed in a day during the time of the Beast.
God was not angry at the people for building the tower of babel.
it was the technology or the ability of what they would be able to create if they stayed there they would quickly turn wicked again so they he had to separate them or they would quickly turn self-destructive and self dependent to repeat what he did that brought about the flood.
“And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.”
Genesis 11:5-9 KJV
Not a KJV only.
when people lose dependency on God they become self-destructive and start bragging on themselves and or believe they are one. Plenty of history to say that.
Nimrod means rebell against God.
they didn't wanna scatter across the earth and God told him to scatter.
The scattering created the nations.
From there he chose a nation and not a strong one to show his power.
Please correct the article to show that it was not God’s anger that sent them but to save them.
Confusing their language slowed down this process.
as we can rapidly see what's happening as people are unifying on a global scale and it is self-destructive. Some benefits, but on the whole and the trajectory it's going is self-destructive.
thank you for considering.
Pages