The Biblical Moses is primarily based on the figure of conquistador Fernando Cortés

KD: This was posted by @emperornorton as a comment. Figured it was interesting enough to be a stand alone article.


I claim, in contravention of orthodox history and theology that:
  • 1) the stories related in the first five books of the Old Testament (the Pentateuch) were written in the early 16th century and relate events centered on the explusion of Jews from Spain and the Conquest of Mexico.
  • 2) the Biblical Moses is primarily based on the figure of conquistador Fernando Cortés.
  • 3) all the events described in the Bible took place, if they took place, in the Americas (with the exception of Spain).
  • 4) the Protestant Reformation and the invention of the printing press provided the opportunity and means of injecting the aforesaid texts (and others) into the standard Bible canon.
new_moses.jpg

ABOVE: Why is Cortés constantly compared to Moses?

Before I adduce positive evidence for these claims, I remind you that the traditional view, placing these events in the area of the Middle East and thereabouts, rests merely on the correspondence of like geographic placenames, and (I guess) the perceived implausibility of faking something like that. The other forms of evidence for the traditional view, the kind that you'd expect to be all over the place, are conspicuously absent.

Most strikingly, the ground in the "Holy Land," per its conventional location, hasn't yielded any archaeological evidence for the many events, battles, landforms, cities, structures, or persons described in the Old Testament scriptures. And it's not for lack of anybody of trying to find them. Researchers have spent centuries looking for something to scientifically legitimate the Biblical narrative in Palestine. The true believers in these efforts are willing to tolerate a standard of evidence that is minimal indeed but even they can't do better than submit their constrained conjectures apologetically.

You'll see a lot of statements like these, taken from Finegan's The Archaeological Background of the Hebrew-Christian Religion, which is typical of the genre:
  • "we may say that Egypt affords us no direct evidence of the sojourn of the Israelites."
  • "the much-to-be-desired evidence at Jericho is lacking."
  • "At the time of the Israelites, there was no city [Jerusalem] there"
Apologetes like Finegan, undeterred, manage to count these problems as a special form of proof. The sacking of Jerusalem, he says in this line, "is reflected only too clearly in the archeological realm by the paucity of important materials." And as for the Conquest of Caanan, he notes that "Joshua evidently did a thorough job of destruction." Tautologies like these and the occasional excavated well that might have been the one Joseph drew water from is about all there is connecting the Bible to the "Bible lands."

Unless, that is, you count the fake antiquities. I don't. The only way the Dead Sea scrolls could look any more fake was if they were found stuffed in a Bud Light bottle. Even the Pyramids of Giza appear to be modern creations, constructed during Napoleon's Egyptian campaign. Most of the famous Egyptian relics were allegedly found at the same time and must likewise come under suspicion.

sea_of_cortez.jpg

ABOVE: The Sea of Cortez (Gulf of California)

In America we don't have this problem. The evidence is right in front of our faces. Even the geographic place-markers for the scriptural events are still around. Just look at any map. I'll only post a few examples of buildings in California that seem to predate the official occupation of the country. I think everyone is familiar with these things, so I won't belabor the point. Individually these don't point infallibly toward Mosaic conquest, but if you examine these along with the names of counties, cities, mountains, lakes, and so forth in the area a very compelling pattern emerges. We will see that the constellation of exotic place names strewn across the American Southwest is not derived from the collective whim of pioneers inspired variously by nostalgia or perceived similitude--no, there's a plot and a purpose.

kings_county.jpg

ABOVE: A cluster of strange buildings in Kings County in California's San Joaquin Valley. Was this the scene of a Biblical battle?


As a correlate to my claimed identification of Moses as Cortés, I suggest that the traditional Biblical terms on the left hand-side refer in fact to the corresponding cognate-terms on the right:
  • Pharaoh / King Ferdinand
  • The Nile / The Gila
  • Moabites / Mojavites
  • Arabian Sea / Carribean Sea
  • Mediterranean Sea (Great Sea) / Pacific Ocean (Great Sea)
  • The Dead Sea / Salton Sea
  • Jordan River / San Joaquin River
exodus.jpg

Some of these suppositions allow us to authenticate Biblical entities that would otherwise remain mysterious. For instance, the existence of the Moabite tribe, as examined on the traditional table of evidence, seems doubtful. Some of the other identifications redound upon existing claims, but I think the stronger case can be made for the alternatives I suggested.

Now, in identifying Moses as Cortés, it is not necessary that there be one historical individual with the same name and same resumé as the personage of Fernando Cortés as we know him. At the very time the conquistadors were marching across Mexico, Spain herself was rocked by the revolutionary comunero (communist) uprising, which group identified its governmental pretensions by the name of "Cortés" as well. It is hard (unless you're an historian I guess) not to infer a conspiratorial link between the two events, the conquest abroad and the revolution at home. But whether one was named for the other or both in reference to a concept significant to the cause it is not necessary to determine for my purposes. By "Cortés," I mean only the person who led the Mexican Conquest.

old_sanfrancisco.jpg

ABOVE: Old San Francisco. Was it conquered by Cortés?

There are several obvious similarities between Moses and Cortés. Moses assumed his position of influence among the Egyptians by means of infiltration. Cortés likewise made use of intrigue to attain his leadership position for the conquest. Furthermore, his curious habit of attributing judgments to "the Christians," suggests substantial versimilitude along religious lines as well. Moses is said to have written five books. Cortés wrote five letters. They were both pursued across water. They both suppressed attempts at mutiny. They both carried a staff, etc.

san_simeon.jpg

ABOVE: Is California the real "holy land"?

Further, many of the details of the Mosaic narrative are consistent only with a setting in the Americas. The fig trees scattered about the hills of Palestine were planted in the last two hundred years--after being imported from California. Israel's apocalypic red heiffer that's been in the news lately also came from California. And how many bears are there in Palestine?

ersatz_israel.jpg

ABOVE: Why is it necessary to change place names there?

Another possible clue is provided by the unusual variation historians have imposed on Cortés' first name. All contemporary accounts referred to him as "Fernando," with the occasional "Ferdinand" or "Ferdinandus" thrown in. But nowadays it's always "Hernán." Why? I suggest that the variant form is intended to signify Moses' brother "Aaron" (the Spanish h is silent).

red_sea.jpg

ABOVE: The Sea of Cortés is also known as the "Red Sea"

A convincing point of coincidence is found in the naming of the Gulf of California, or Sea of Cortez. This body of water was historically known as the "Red Sea," or "Vermillion Sea" (vermillion is a scarlet red) under which names it appears on the old maps. It may be objected that this is a somewhat generic descriptive term. But there are good reasons to regard this circumstance as significant.

newspapers.jpg

First, there is not any other body of water, besides the familiar one located along the Sinai Peninsula, that is named the "Red Sea." Second, Eusabius Kino (real last name Kuhn) a Jesuit rector of Sonora, Mexico who upon reconfirming the continuity of California with the North American landmass in 1702 (most people thought California was an island at the time) declared that his discovery gave confirmation to the Exodus of Moses as recorded in the Bible. If he didn't equate Moses with Cortés then that would be a ridiculous thing to say, right?

battles.jpg

ABOVE: What do those flaming red castles represent?

California was depicted as an island by virtually all maps published from the late 16th century to the middle of the 18th century. However the earliest maps of America--those published around the time of the Mexican conquest--depict California along the Western edge of the continent much as it appears on maps today. We're expected to believe that the centuries-long California island was just a cartographic blunder that went viral. Supposedly no one bothered to sail up the Gulf of California for a span of over a hundred years yet somehow still managed to name and draw a bunch of new islands that popped up there.

ruined_cities.jpg

I think California did become an island in the 16th century, shortly after Cortés and his allies marched there across the desert. The subsequent flooding of the land east of the Sierra Nevada Mountains--the area known as the "Great Basin"--would be the event described in the Bible as the destruction of Pharoah's pursuing army.

According to the Jesuits the strongests earthquakes recorded in America, up to that point, occurred at the end of the 17th century. This was shortly before Eusabius Kino rediscovered a path by land from Mexico to California, and one of these may have been the event that made that possible. This, or a subsequent earthquake may have also been responsible for creating the San Francisco Bay. It is remarkable that none of the sailing expeditions or even explorers on land seem to have been aware of the largest harbor on the West Coast of the continent until 1769. The professional explanation for this is fog.

masonic_jokes.jpg

Some people say Freemasonry has been around for five hundred years or so. Others claim to trace Freemasonry all the way back to Moses. What if they're both right?

The Indians have a tradition that the Bay was created--i.e. opened up to the Sea--during an earthquake that occurred somewhere in this time frame. There was simply a large inland lake there before, they say. Indeed, much of the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys were also covered by lakes until around the time of the Civil War. All of this leads me to suspect that it was an earthquake that separated California from the mainland, either by subsidence of the desert lands to the east of California, by rising of sea levels, or even by the destruction of a dam on the Colorado river.

Now the most obvious grounds for rebuttal to my claims is the alleged priority of the Old Testament scriptures. As often happens, however, the evidence for this "obvious truth" crumbles under inspection. Mainstream authorities invariably claim very great antiquity for the Pentateuch but the oldest possible extant edition, as far as I can tell, is from 1537 or so. And I couldn't find the text to that edition online. The Wycliffe Bible, which predates the conquest, is supposed to contain the Old Testament, but every edition I have managed to track down has included only the New. If my theory is correct, the claimed Wycliffe Old Testament is the sort of lie that testifies strongly for my thesis. It also looks to me like the Old Testament was originally written in a language other than Hebrew, but I'm not sure.

wyclif_vs_thomas_mathew_bible.jpg

ABOVE LEFT: The Wycliffe Bible--No Old Testament

The allegedly ancient scrolls, parchments, and fragments of the Torah that are said to exist are vouchsafed merely on the authority of the various familiar institutions whose character, based on their track record, does not entitle them to our trust. They must be accepted on faith alone.

Legitimate documents, in my experience, tend to be embedded in a clearly discernible web of referential interconnectedness; this quality is almost impossible to impose ex post facto, and seems to me to be absent in the ancient scriptures. For instance, the year-long Disputation (a kind of compulsory religious symposium) between Christian and Jewish clergy in 15th-century Spain concerned itself, on the Jewish side, with the Talmud alone. As far as I can tell, the records disclose no reference to the books attributed to Moses at all. How could this be?

moses_art.jpg

Along with the old texts we have the supposedly ancient works of art depicting these same events to contend with. I will just say that the circumstances attending an investigation into these claims are much the same as related above.

Finally, I mentioned above the possibility that the destruction of a dam could have produced a deluge consistent with the Biblical narrative of the Egyptians' drowning in the Red Sea. It may be worth noting that the U.S. fifty dollar bill is said to depict the Hoover Dam (bursting?) and that 2021 is the 500th anniversary of the conquest of Mexico.

hoover_dam_us_50_dollar_bill.jpg

Thanks for reading!
 

Banta

Active member
Joined
Feb 4, 2021
Messages
200
Reaction score
507
I love digging into the Bible this way. The most popular book of all-time seems to have a severe lacking of critical analysis. Either it's outright dismissed or viewed through a dogmatic religious lens, which relies more on tradition and debatable interpretations from "authorities." Actually reading the text shows how many presumptions go into any "fundamentalist" teachings (like the Talmud being the source for OT authorship) and this is further compounded by translation issues. Some of my favorite posts on the previous site were by Jim D, who was personally translating passages from the "original" Hebrew/Greek (again, maybe those aren't the actual original languages, but I suspect you're getting closer than the KJV, or especially some more modern derivations).

Fomenko, as many are likely aware, also disagrees with the location assigned to Biblical events (placing them mostly around Italy). I think trying to accurately place events is going to be very speculative at best, but I ultimately take away the fact that the text even allows alternative suppositions being telling by itself.

And to point out something else that everyone likely knows, the Book of Mormon, allegedly transcribed from "golden plates" (interesting that they're gold...) found in the "burned-over districts" by John Smith, is all about the history of North America and Jesus's post-resurrection trip. Now, of course, most believe (and it's not unreasonable) that John Smith was essentially a con man (and the Mormans have always had ties to the government/military intelligence and were integral in "settling" the West) but I wonder if this isn't another case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Organized religions as a whole seem to be a "limited hangout" so to speak and as we see with the muddled iconography of supposed "Christian" Catholic cathedrals and the like, I don't think we're getting anywhere near the full picture (or even what the leaders of these religions truly believe in).
But nowadays it's always "Hernán." Why? I suggest that the variant form is intended to signify Moses' brother "Aaron" (the Spanish h is silent).
Can you elaborate on this point? If later historians are trying to distance Cortés from any comparisons to Moses (or are ignorant of it), why assign him a name similar to Moses's brother?
Second, Eusabius Kino (real last name Kuhn) a Jesuit rector of Sonora, Mexico who upon reconfirming the continuity of California with the North American landmass in 1702 (most people thought California was an island at the time) declared that his discovery gave confirmation to the Exodus of Moses as recorded in the Bible.
Do you happen to have the source for this statement? I'd like to see how it was phrased. I tried looking through the website below which has some of Kino's writings, but did not turn up any results for Moses or Exodus.
Also, what book did the scan referring to a "Californian Palestine" come from? It is a very curious phrase.
Mainstream authorities invariably claim very great antiquity for the Pentateuch but the oldest possible extant edition, as far as I can tell, is from 1537 or so
I'd almost like a dedicated thread to this. Though, I'm not sure what I would even believe... how do we even attest to an "original" lasting centuries? Most of the time, the texts in question have been "re-discovered" in the 19th century or later, and basically none going further back have what I would consider to be a documented chain of custody. And then they rely on carbon dating or descriptive text in the book to date it further. Just take a look through the examples listed here and see if you'd be comfortable betting on their extrapolated ages:
The standard for assessing historical texts is extremely low because logically, without a time machine, there are going to be some serious assumptions going into it. When compared to a legal standard for the protecting important documents, it's quickly apparent:
In practice, a chain of custody is a chronological paper trail documenting when, how, and by whom individual items of physical or electronic evidence—such as cell phone logs—were collected, handled, analyzed, or otherwise controlled during an investigation. Under the law, an item will not be accepted as evidence during the trial—will not be seen by the jury—unless the chain of custody is an unbroken and properly documented trail without gaps or discrepancies. In order to convict a defendant of a crime, the evidence against them must have been handled in a meticulously careful manner to prevent tampering or contamination.
Comparing to:
Bernheim (1889) and Langlois & Seignobos (1898) proposed a seven-step procedure for source criticism in history:

• If the sources all agree about an event, historians can consider the event proven.
• However, majority does not rule; even if most sources relate events in one way, that version will not prevail unless it passes the test of critical textual analysis.
• The source whose account can be confirmed by reference to outside authorities in some of its parts can be trusted in its entirety if it is impossible similarly to confirm the entire text.
• When two sources disagree on a particular point, the historian will prefer the source with most "authority"—that is the source created by the expert or by the eyewitness.
Eyewitnesses are, in general, to be preferred especially in circumstances where the ordinary observer could have accurately reported what transpired and, more specifically, when they deal with facts known by most contemporaries.
If two independently created sources agree on a matter, the reliability of each is measurably enhanced.
When two sources disagree and there is no other means of evaluation, then historians take the source which seems to accord best with common sense.
• Subsequent descriptions of historical method, outlined below, have attempted to overcome the credulity built into the first step formulated by the nineteenth century historiographers by stating principles not merely by which different reports can be harmonized but instead by which a statement found in a source may be considered to be unreliable or reliable as it stands on its own.
Somehow, I think my "common sense" is different from the experts...

Now, of course, the reason why we have such low standards for historical documents is for practical reasons. These academic professions and then the antiquities markets would not exist if they couldn't validate anything. So, again, we get the pseudoscientific doublespeak, where things are "validated" but also only our "best guess." Or as wiki puts it:
Noting that few documents are accepted as completely reliable, Louis Gottschalk sets down the general rule, "for each particular of a document the process of establishing credibility should be separately undertaken regardless of the general credibility of the author." An author's trustworthiness in the main may establish a background probability for the consideration of each statement, but each piece of evidence extracted must be weighed individually.
"So, this author is a liar, but maybe they didn't lie all the time! Better check to justify my entire industry!"

Anyway, very interesting post with some food for thought! I do like the idea that the Great Basin was flooded, though I am not sure how this would have made California an island. Not that I totally believe this depiction, but it does seem to agree with the visible topography on other maps:
GB-Definition-Map.jpg
Just not sure how the water would extend out the Pacific in the north to create a California island (that that dries up or something within a couple centuries...). Not saying it isn't possible, but the problems with trying to pinpoint this down are the same with trying to accurately date a book. There are so many factors... The mainstream likes to declare that the maps are wrong, but it's possible that the Californian "Red Sea" extended further north in the past but also did not quite make California an island. I noted previously about the Spanish reluctance to fully explore the Pacific Northwest and KD provided a follow-up showing that the alleged ones that did have serious questions about their legitimacy (yet some interesting observations that are seemingly impossible if someone didn't lay eyes on the area):
The point is, all options are on the table. I don't believe mapmakers were just making stuff up, however, I do believe whatever intelligence they were receiving could have been compromised. For the issue of the island of California, I'm more partial to the idea that there was another land mass off the coast of current California that has been submerged, but you could knock me over with a leaf. Maybe the maps aren't even in actual chronological order... as usual, there are many more questions than answers.
 
Last edited:
  • A Avatar
    Info

  • Sonofabor

    Member
    Joined
    Jan 11, 2021
    Messages
    105
    Reaction score
    177
    The only way the Dead Sea scrolls could look any more fake was if they were found stuffed in a Bud Light bottle.
    Also possible is that they were/are real-- akin to the reality of the Mandela effect. See John Lamb Lash on The Mandela Effect Decoded. The major idea is that the planetary Logos is moving/intervening materially to affect planetary consciousness. The implications of this thesis for our inquiry are enormous-- if true.
     

    emperornorton

    New member
    Joined
    Apr 2, 2021
    Messages
    3
    Reaction score
    18
    Fomenko, as many are likely aware, also disagrees with the location assigned to Biblical events (placing them mostly around Italy). I think trying to accurately place events is going to be very speculative at best, but I ultimately take away the fact that the text even allows alternative suppositions being telling by itself.
    And to point out something else that everyone likely knows, the Book of Mormon, allegedly transcribed from "golden plates" (interesting that they're gold...) found in the "burned-over districts" by John Smith, is all about the history of North America and Jesus's post-resurrection trip. Now, of course, most believe (and it's not unreasonable) that John Smith was essentially a con man (and the Mormans have always had ties to the government/military intelligence and were integral in "settling" the West) but I wonder if this isn't another case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
    Fomenko and Mormonism reject, as I do, many of the assumptions that undergird the mainstream theories of history and in some respects, Mormonism in particular, anticipate the shift of geographic focus I endorse. On the other hand, I regard both Fomenko and LDS as essentially political enterprises, so that even putative elements of truth therein, supposing there were, could and would be merely instrumental to the ulterior purposes of recruitment or misdirection, as the particular case may be.

    Mormonism is essentially Christianity (or an approximation thereof) grafted onto Freemasonry and it's weird enough to make it seem as though it could be based on secret Masonic knowledge. However, freemasons lie to each other at every level of their club so it's doubtful they would tell the truth to the general public even if they knew what it was. The Fomenko scholarship, meanwhile, has that combination of grandiosity and imbecility that reminds me of the garbage the GRU comes up with, like UMMOISM.
    Organized religions as a whole seem to be a "limited hangout" so to speak and as we see with the muddled iconography of supposed "Christian" Catholic cathedrals and the like, I don't think we're getting anywhere near the full picture (or even what the leaders of these religions truly believe in).

    Can you elaborate on this point? If later historians are trying to distance Cortés from any comparisons to Moses (or are ignorant of it), why assign him a name similar to Moses's brother?
    I don't think there was anybody whose real name was Fernando Cortes. Lopez De Gomara, in one of his books, says something like "Ferdinando Cortes, so called, because he looks for gold in the court-room" (my paraphrase). I imagine this moniker would be along the lines of "The Courthouse Conquistador" in its derisive force--but I might be way off base. Furthermore, in almost every 16th-century book relating to the conquest there is evidence of alterations/manipulations to the text (both physical and digital). I will say that the Bancroft Library, the John Carter Brown Library, and Google seem to be the most enthusiastic players of this pathetic game.

    There is also just a lot of plain weirdness. The "Hernan" abbreviation may be an attempt to cover two people with one name or maybe it's just one of those cutesy in-your-face jokes they're so fond of.

    edits.jpg

    ABOVE: Cortez, Coortez, Cottez...What does it matter?

    edits2.jpg
    • LEFT, CENTER: Spelling, capitalization anomalies abound.
    • RIGHT: Highlighted words are in different, more modern font (i.e. added to text). All examples are from the first English edition of "The Pleasante Historie."
    Just not sure how the water would extend out the Pacific in the north to create a California island (that that dries up or something within a couple centuries...). Not saying it isn't possible, but the problems with trying to pinpoint this down are the same with trying to accurately date a book. There are so many factors... The mainstream likes to declare that the maps are wrong, but it's possible that the Californian "Red Sea" extended further north in the past but also did not quite make California an island. I noted previously about the Spanish reluctance to fully explore the Pacific Northwest and KD provided a follow-up showing that the alleged ones that did have serious questions about their legitimacy (yet some interesting observations that are seemingly impossible if someone didn't lay eyes on the area):
    The point is, all options are on the table. I don't believe mapmakers were just making stuff up, however, I do believe whatever intelligence they were receiving could have been compromised. For the issue of the island of California, I'm more partial to the idea that there was another land mass off the coast of current California that has been submerged, but you could knock me over with a leaf. Maybe the maps aren't even in actual chronological order... as usual, there are many more questions than answers.
    You're right that the topology of the terrain doesn't concede an obvious line of separation in terms of the supposed island. I considered a lot of different possibilities on this point. The thing is, I'm not prepossessed of the California-as-an-island idea for corroboration of my theory; it's just a judgment based on the map evidence and the fact that the "great basin" remained unexplored until around 1850. Likewise, I conjectured that an earthquake may have occurred in order to explain the changes shown on the maps, not because it is essential to my theory.

    I thought the line of separation (supposing there be one) would most likely be along the Western side of the Great Basin. Indeed some of the maps of the California island depict what seems to be the Sierra Nevada Range along the island's eastern edge. In this case the line of separation would correspond roughly to US freeway 395 in Nevada. However, other maps don't really show any mountains on the island (though they don't appear along the Western coast of the remaining continent either). That leads me to wonder whether an earthquake created, or at least substantially elevated, the Sierra Nevada Mountains and if that's why there was apparently so much gold to be found on them.

    A problem with this supposition is that there are trees evincing great antiquity scattered across the elevation gradient in the mountains. The Sequoias, for instance, seem to be several thousand years old and can be found from 4000' to 8000', which, among other factors, leads me away from supposing topographical changes of this severity.

    Another possibility is that California was an island in the unextraordinary sense that a river from the northern part of the continent (now extinct) pursued a course southward in a track parallel to the state's eastern border and emptied into the Gulf of California (or joined the Colorado near its mouth) and formed something like a moat on that side. On the maps in question, however, the distance between the island and the continent, north of its present terminus, looks to be about 20 miles or so (i.e. roughly comparable to the width of the present Gulf) so that this supposition seems rather unlikely as well.

    It is of course also possible that the mapmakers were genuinely in error or else were conspiring to misrepresent the geography of the country. I appreciate the comments.

    Ok. One more picture.

    joseph_san_jose.jpg
     
    Last edited:

    Banta

    Active member
    Joined
    Feb 4, 2021
    Messages
    200
    Reaction score
    507
    The Fomenko scholarship, meanwhile, has that combination of grandiosity and imbecility that reminds me of the garbage the GRU comes up with, like UMMOISM.
    Heh, well, that's a fairly harsh assessment. To be clear, I was just mentioning his conclusions, not endorsing them. There are clear limits to what his methodology can reveal and I suspect like most people, he's probably overly in love with his pet theories. On the other hand though, reconstructing a fragmented and obscured chronology is a massive task and although I don't find his work to be anything close to definitive, it does contain a lot of thought provoking elements, which honestly doesn't seem too different from what we're doing here... finding geographic/biographical similarities and looking for more correlations to support it.
    I don't think there was anybody whose real name was Fernando Cortes.
    Thank you for your elaboration. I was just wondering if there was more because of you highlighting Ferdinand II, implying that the entire name could be more of a title. Still a little confused on why anyone would purposely leave a reference to Moses with the Hernan business... I acknowledge the "in-joke" possibility, but it seems as plausible to me that it's just an abbreviation of Hernando.
    • LEFT, CENTER: Spelling, capitalization anomalies abound.
    • RIGHT: Highlighted words are in different, more modern font (i.e. added to text). All examples are from the first English edition of "The Pleasante Historie."
    Interesting examples. I have seen that myself in various older documents and if nothing else, it's super convenient that names and places get the "different font" treatment.
    On the maps in question, however, the distance between the island and the continent, north of its present terminus, looks to be about 20 miles or so (i.e. roughly comparable to the width of the present Gulf) so that this supposition seems rather unlikely as well.

    It is of course also possible that the mapmakers were genuinely in error or else were conspiring to misrepresent the geography of the country.
    I'm not sure that scale can be trusted on most maps (even recent ones?). Just for example, I was flipping through some 16th century maps of Italy yesterday and found some fairly large discrepancy between the modern location of Lake Bracciano relative to the coast and Rome and where it was in this map.

    Not to derail the thread, but in that example it seems unlikely to me that the lake moved, or substantially more coastline was found, and even though it's just a local map which you'd think would be more accurate than a map of an entire continent, an error was seemingly made.

    As usual, I suspect our history is a collection of innocent mistakes, outright lies, and everything in between. The whole human experience!

    I appreciate your reply. I would still very much like the source for the Kino statement that "his discovery gave confirmation to the Exodus of Moses as recorded in the Bible", as I think it's one of the most interesting and direct aspects of what you've presented.
     

    wawdahflows

    New member
    Joined
    Jun 4, 2021
    Messages
    12
    Reaction score
    21
    What’s up everyone!

    The historical (obviously being in question) Cortes(z) can not equate to the biblical Moses. Love the effort going into proper research on this site but this topic doesn’t seem thoroughly thought out and a bit forced. I’d hope anyone relating Scripture has in fact read/studies it extensively i.e transliterations (Aramaic & Paleo Hebrew).

    In a nutshell:

    The Biblical Exodus happened here in The Americas (dozens of non-Morman sources corroborate it). This is why there is no evidence found over in the so-called Middle East; modern Palestine/Israel were never The Holy Lands - land of Canaan. Just another of the many expensive lies TPTB keep up.

    The Invasion/Colonization of the World + Americas by Gog & Magog according to prophecies is where the story of Cortes falls in line with. TPTB are descendants of Gog & Magog. You’re modern “European” or any “pale-white” skinned individual (this includes Asian and Latin nations) is a descendant of Gog & Magog. This isn’t of a personal opinion but a fact that requires an objective perspective of reason & logic without emotion (there is no pan-Africanist angle as the entire world was melanated with “African” features and origin of man is also in The Americas not Africa ). Gog-Magog: melanated Japhetic forefathers intermixing with recessive gene Cainite (not Canaanite)-Nephilim/Neanderthal/Cynocephaly women (amazons) after killing males. And the homogeneous mixed generations ensued -in a relative small amount of time I might add. I know it might be a tough pill to swallow for some readers on here but in-depth research into biology & proper history proves this without a doubt.

    Popular opinion suggests Gog & Magog are mentioned by name briefly within Torah (OT) specifically located in prophecies of Ezekiel. But upon careful inspection and a sharp reading comprehension shows that they are also mentioned as early as in Books of Genesis, Deuteronomy, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Daniel just not by those specific names but by root character.

    Tartaria = Isaiah 19:23-25; case closed. Also the name speaks for itself as it is a combination of the ancient non Semitic names of Assyria and Egypt with the Hebrew Tau representing Israel. T(Ar)T(Aria). Ancient Assyria are the hordes of Ghengis Khan
    • Ar = Babylon/Assyria
    • Aria/Ariea = Egypt
    The amount of information to support all of this is insane and quite frankly in your face everyday. I could spend a week nonstop just posting without responding alone and it still wouldn’t cover all the information

    819BCDB3-F51C-4164-923D-C971C771CE52.jpeg

    Source

    0042137B-BBDB-4BAB-B6CD-C0AFF7EA92C9.jpeg


    “But in times following they pursued richer Conquests, and more easy though further distant, by which (to omit their other enterprises not here to be spoken of) they were drawn at length into Asia the less, and occupied those parts which had formerly been held by their Progenitors.”

    Wonder what “enterprises” they participated in that’s couldn’t be discussed publicly to spread so fast?

    Truth is well beyond being strange at this point.
     

    Banta

    Active member
    Joined
    Feb 4, 2021
    Messages
    200
    Reaction score
    507
    I could spend a week nonstop just posting without responding alone and it still wouldn’t cover all the information
    If you were willing, that sounds good to me because I have a lot of questions. Not the least of which is, why do we think that the Biblical account of Exodus is necessarily accurate in the first place? Heresy, I know, but it does strike me as another potential explanation for why no archeological record has ever been discovered.
    (dozens of non-Morman sources corroborate it).
    This would be a good place to start. Plus what translations of the OT you're working with, and a little more substance on the Gog Magog assertions.

    To be clear, I am very open to any potential reconstruction of historical events, I don't really have a stake in any particular fight and I do find your "nutshell" recap to be interesting, but I'm honestly not sure what can be reasonably considered "proper history" that you state is important towards an educated understanding.
     
  • A Avatar
    Info

  • emperornorton

    New member
    Joined
    Apr 2, 2021
    Messages
    3
    Reaction score
    18
    I appreciate your reply. I would still very much like the source for the Kino statement that "his discovery gave confirmation to the Exodus of Moses as recorded in the Bible", as I think it's one of the most interesting and direct aspects of what you've presented.
    It's from Kino's Historical Memoir of Pimeria Alta, 1683-1711, Volume II (edited by Herbert Bolton) which is included in Spain in the West: A Series of Original Documents from Foreign Archives, Volume IV, published by the University of California in 1919. The relevant passage is on pages 87-88.

    Kino relates his discovery of the land route between Mexico and California, on account of which, he says, three "admirable sacred texts were confirmed." The second alleged confirmed text is "Terra aparuit arida et in Mari Rubro." That is, "Dry land appeared in the Red Sea."

    Bolton appends a footnote here, attributing the text to the 19th chapter of the Book of Wisdom, which contains a version of the Israelites' crossing of the Red Sea that is similar to the familiar version in Exodus chapter XIV but has a few cataclysmic additions. In fact, the 16th verse of Exodus XIV is a closer match to the quoted phrase than Bolton's asserted source, but it doesn't really matter because they both describe the same event and because we wouldn't expect Kino's discovery to be a confirmation of anything in the Bible which is related as historical--i.e. as opposed to prophetic--occurrence.

    Kino does, however, seem to imply that the claimed California island was merely a deception perpetrated by mapmakers. Be that as it may, on my reading, chapter 19 of the Book of Wisdom (for what it's worth*) sort of makes the opposite case (below).
    But the ungodly were assailed to the end by pitiless anger,
    for God knew in advance even their future actions:
    how, though they themselves had permitted your people to depart
    and hastily sent them out,
    they would change their minds and pursue them.
    For while they were still engaged in mourning,
    and were lamenting at the graves of their dead,
    they reached another foolish decision,
    and pursued as fugitives those whom they had begged and compelled to leave.
    ...​
    For the whole creation in its nature was fashioned anew,
    complying with your commands,
    so that your children might be kept unharmed.
    The cloud was seen overshadowing the camp,
    and dry land emerging where water had stood before,
    an unhindered way out of the Red Sea,
    and a grassy plain out of the raging waves,
    ...​
    For the elements changed places with one another,
    as on a harp the notes vary the nature of the rhythm,
    while each note remains the same.
    This may be clearly inferred from the sight of what took place.
    For land animals were transformed into water creatures,
    and creatures that swim moved over to the land.
    Fire even in water retained its normal power,
    and water forgot its fire-quenching nature.
    Flames, on the contrary, failed to consume
    the flesh of perishable creatures that walked among them,
    nor did they melt the crystalline, quick-melting kind of heavenly food.
    For in everything, O Lord, you have exalted and glorified your people,
    and you have not neglected to help them at all times and in all places.
    *Not much, let me say, in the absence of confirmation from better evidence.
     

    wawdahflows

    New member
    Joined
    Jun 4, 2021
    Messages
    12
    Reaction score
    21
    If you were willing, that sounds good to me because I have a lot of questions. Not the least of which is, why do we think that the Biblical account of Exodus is necessarily accurate in the first place? Heresy, I know, but it does strike me as another potential explanation for why no archeological record has ever been discovered.



    This would be a good place to start. Plus what translations of the OT you're working with, and a little more substance on the Gog Magog assertions.

    To be clear, I am very open to any potential reconstruction of historical events, I don't really have a stake in any particular fight and I do find your "nutshell" recap to be interesting, but I'm honestly not sure what can be reasonably considered "proper history" that you state is important towards an educated understanding.
    Simple, yet important questions you’re asking. As far as me “non-stop posting” for a week: I’m not sure is KD would “give me the cache (cash)” -see what I did there lol- to begin an Origins Of Gog-Magog thread but I’d be more than willing to. In the meantime I’ll do the best I can to concise what is essentially massive amounts of information regarding subjects into already pre-existing threads.

    As far as my “proper history” comment, I should’ve been more descriptive in that regard. You’re right! What is “proper” history? Most if it not all of us are operating under 3rd hand+ based research when regarding it. It’s not necessarily about trusting every source but more of using discernment and good sense (not common because good sense isn’t common) in putting the pieces of the puzzle together. No lie can stand on its own long enough to deceive generations without half truths mixed in. No need to link any psychological studies about that, everyday observation proves this.

    Most if not ALL institutions around the world center their history or include history based upon the texts of what we call the Bible, which began printing in circulation around the 15th century. Most people start in that era with the corruption of words but sedition by syntax began much earlier (Jeremiah 8:8). This topic alone is an entire thread along with massive differences between Modern Square-Flame script Hebrew vs. Paleo-pic to Hebrew.
    Its the Original Story vs Levitical Legislation is what I’d call it. Hebrew(Ghabar) is a language centered around concrete-cyclical thought as opposed to abstract. Each paleo-picto letter represents concrete concepts of microcosmic life transcending into the macro that can be observed through the senses. Kabbalah, Talmud (Babylonian+”Jerusalem), are Exilic works that synchronize Chaldean/Assyrian/Babylonian abstract thought-history-worship with the Torah. This is where large chunk of Scripture creates confusion among scholars and regular people everyday.

    As far as translations I use:

    Your standard KJV with attached strong’s concordances is what I use. Those translations usually depend upon the Aramaic and from the Aramaic square script I cross reference with Paleo Script lexicon.

    blueletterbible is functional online source.

    Jeff A. Benner runs a site specializing in understanding the ancient Hebrew language. He also provides the paleo Hebrew lexicon I use.


    He as every other modern scholar still clings unto the Aramaic which is the only stumbling block with transliterations. Example: Vau vs Waw.

    The Book of Exodus and the migration after were in fact historical events that took place in the Americas that had worldwide ramifications. The “hearsay” lies within the details of the story as presented to us now.

    example:

    F86D7AAA-2C8E-429B-BBD7-EC4C4B014A35.jpeg

    compared to:

    1B98B163-E55F-4250-9F51-383C8B24C3B6.jpeg

    C0159332-4237-4464-9C9E-AB8F162143AF.jpeg

    1C7711A5-0D83-4768-ABC1-AE6B10CF5B32.jpeg

    It’s appear our guy Huiziton aka Moses was using intuition - a non-local quantum communication propery mechanism The Creator endows man with (“the small voice”), to foresee an impending cataclysmic event. With the help of a specific animal -birds- that have represented spirits in antiquity.

    Water is life. Light-Electromagnetism while providing “warmth” has hydrodynamic properties. I would incline anyone to research into this. Hamitic nations incorporated the actual usage of fire to worship; “my people forsake The Living Waters....”
    07480DD1-77CD-4116-81B9-12CFBDBDAB24.jpeg


    1A7010B7-5C32-4D18-BA92-28EDF9E45C13.jpeg

    7435050F-158C-4115-87AC-06DFD67B1C05.jpeg

    This subject within itself is another deep dive. Hope everyone knows how to swim lol.

    Regarding other dozens of other sources I’ve mentioned, you could start with:

    Per wiki: James Adair (c.1709–1783) was a native of County Antrim, Ireland, who went to North America and became a trader with the Native Americans of the Southeastern Woodlands.

    In 1775, stimulated by the encouragement of a few intimate friends, such as Sir William Johnson, 1st Baronet, Colonel George Croghan, George Galphin, and Lachlan McGillivray, Adair determined to throw his notes into the form of a book. He mentions a string of disadvantages under which he laboured, notably the jealousy, secrecy, and closeness of the Indians, but hoped to be able to correct the very superficial notions that prevailed as to their civilisation. His book was called The History of the American Indians . . . containing an Account of their Origin, Language, Manners, . . . and other Particulars, sufficient to render it A Complete Indian System . . . with A New Map of the Country.

    You can view the book here.

    Another source

    Barbara Ann/Allan Simons 1836 book
    57750C7B-765D-4F7D-9944-F11E0DC4B456.jpeg

    2EA5B07F-8AF0-458E-AED9-34DCFF2C0181.jpeg

    Some interesting tidbits from the preface:

    Our main subject for this thread was and has been implicated in the cover-up of the true ethnicity and history of the Aboriginals (not all) of the land.

    Was Hernan Cortez the historical Moses? Negative.

    Gog-Magog on the other hand, i can leave you with this:

    7F922C6F-8AF4-4A3B-A7F5-DEABC772C05C.jpeg

    And excerpt from the research of Ravikumar Kurup

    His research is thorough yet repetitive. I’m quite certain English isn’t his first language. I’ve also noticed either a direct intent or “accidental” slips where he switches the behaviors of Neanderthals and Homo sapiens after already establishing certain characteristics about the groups.

    Nonetheless this guys has good work to mine and discern through. Most certainly knows what’s he’s talking about even if his knowledge in history and mythology is limited.

    His team cured a women of covid-19 back in April 2020. All through dieting. Go figure

    Tons of more genetic research to confirm Neanderthal as Childen of Cain-GogMagog.

    Most aren’t aware it’s in fact TWO creations of “man” in Genesis. One group is commanded to subjugate the entire earth through force and spread out and be fruitful (high sexuality- sex heightens the brain) while the other was told to govern the garden by working in unison with it and reproduction was not yet introduced as it’s a creative power to be respected (see Kinesthetic Intelligence, for Adam was no dummy).

    Cain’s paternal heritage were from the first group being led consciously by Lucifer during that era not Adam himself. The mark of Cain was the loss of melanin, not to be confused with albinism

    This was a lot to write but I’m more than willing to answer more questions!

    Example of Gog-Magog referenced in Scripture without name would be Deuteronomy 32:21-30 and cross reference a precept like Ezekiel 38. This mind you was done just using normal English translation. When you break it down further that’s where the revelations begin.


    O Lord, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ends of the earth, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit.
     

    Banta

    Active member
    Joined
    Feb 4, 2021
    Messages
    200
    Reaction score
    507
    Just wanted to quickly thank you both! I sometimes worry that I'm coming off as combative, so I'm very pleased that the requests for further information were taken in the spirit I intended them. Now, I have a lot of reading to do before I can comment any more specifically, which is honestly delightful.
     

    wawdahflows

    New member
    Joined
    Jun 4, 2021
    Messages
    12
    Reaction score
    21
    Just wanted to quickly thank you both! I sometimes worry that I'm coming off as combative, so I'm very pleased that the requests for further information were taken in the spirit I intended them. Now, I have a lot of reading to do before I can comment any more specifically, which is honestly delightful.
    No problem and you’re welcome! It’s understandable as I too was holding my breadth hoping members on here didn’t take my on-the-go mobile writing style as a way to stir up any “racial prejudices”. Subjects are touchy I would say but it’s this sort of information that must become widespread in order to help alleviate the burdens of deception being perpetrated by The Powers At Hand aka TPTB. It’s also the key information as to why many on here run into roadblocks while uncovering the truth.

    Also I’d like to add you’re gem about the Great Basin regions - definitely went hand in hand with my past research about that area as it also relates to the biblical Azal of Zechariah 14:5.

    Another observation I’ve noticed amongst discussions about that region was the location of Quivera < Kheebera < Khyber < Chebron < Biblical Hebron and “Granada” around region as well.

    805B78E2-F519-48CC-9471-D4AF6CFE78D1.jpeg

    Great work!

    TPAH aka TPTB are hiding the identity of WHO the Aborigine Red Man of the Americas are.
    This would include Hernan Cortes.

    An example of a popular Red Man that has been misnomered as negroe, black or African-American, etc. with a root cause from this and this:

    68330371-7A3F-4504-AE36-FBA6B5F90DF1.jpeg

    “I have this American Indian in me. Apache Indian. I look like my dad...”

    This what red-ruddy really looks like. We blindly call it black. Some say afro-asiatic. It’s all wordplay.

    With all this southwestern digging and it’s relation to “Asia” on this site...

    ...stuff starts to blend in:

    9A936E15-8098-4D02-AC4C-95D0634BDA9D.jpg

    2F2A45C0-539B-4C02-8E3E-FCD0AD6BAE04.jpeg

    7CE05C58-51F1-4C53-8AE1-B82FB8D4F0D0.jpeg

    F57C8DB2-44E2-4F2C-96C6-E2A1ACE29BC0.jpeg

    6E0E0E26-21F3-4F00-AC5C-79620EB5BC57.jpg

    No seriously, why is there photographic evidence of a katana being held by a man whose phenotype and complexion would label him in modern day era as “African-American” (the organic permed straightening of long thick curly hair could throw one off) in the southwestern region during a time where that wouldn’t have been possible?

    Notice any connections?

    The Renaissance - Enlightenment - Iconoclast era was literally about changing the face of history as to what we know it is as today.
     
    Last edited:
    Top