Could our Ancient History merely be Christian Revisionism?

mythstifieD

Well-known member
Messages
153
Likes
359
#1
Book-burning-in-the-Nuremberg-chronicles-e1406730863322[1].jpg
Short post, would like to discuss this idea and maybe brainstorm some evidence for this together.

Something strange happened in the middle ages, there's no doubt. The Muslim invasions both destroyed and 'preserved' precious copies of ancient manuscripts from the land before time. Why the hell did the Church not give a damn about preserving documents? Maybe they had a couple monks back then rewriting the Bible, but how on earth could they not care about anything else? They didn't even care to translate the only book they thought mattered into a language that the local people could understand. The Church was happy with the masses being ignorant and stupid, they could basically write whatever history they wanted because what peasant would ever know better? What little history that would be taught would be directly from the Bible, nothing else, and any evidence of anything else would either have to agree with the Bible or be destroyed. It's hilarious to think that people with that attitude would have also made sure that the Bible itself would not have been altered from it's alleged writings back in the 1st Century. Scholars love to boast "Oh look, these copies of copies of copies are mostly all pretty consistent with each other!" ignoring the fact they just said copies of copies of copies-- no one knows what was written in the books before 325ce. In fact, the only manuscripts that dodged the purge were the Nag Hamaddi scrolls which speak of a VERY different Christianity with a VERY amazing story of our past.

I think we all know this is true, but what I would like help with is collecting actual evidence for this. Either accounts of book burnings, accounts of bishops or church leaders knowingly altering history, or anything else you think would bolster (or even contradict) this hypothesis.

The Church was and is hiding something pretty deep about our past, and I'm also convinced that whatever they're hiding it's exactly this that the Knights Templar found supposedly in Jerusalem, after knowing which they blackmailed the Church and became a "nation unto themselves".

Here's an interesting article to start with from here
http://www.medievalists.net/2014/07/burn-books-middle-ages/
In his recent article, “The Burning of Heretical Books”, University of Oxford historian Alexander Murray examines several questions about the topic. He notes there are over 200 incidences of book burning in the Middle Ages. “There are one or two Carolingian cases,” Murray writes, “a few more in the Gregorian reform and a few more in the ‘twelfth-century renaissance’. It is around 1200 that the pace quickens, and from then on, scarcely a decade passes without a book-burning, the pace rising gradually, but with exceptional spurts between 1232 and 1319 when hitherto immune Jewish books were burned by the cartload. More generally, the acceleration only becomes conspicuous in response to the burst of Wycliffe-Hussite thought in the fifteenth-century, itself – Nota Bene – partly an expression of rising book production.”

What was the purpose of book-burning? Murray explains it was not actually to destroy the books and obliterate these writings. In many cases the original book was not destroyed, but only a copy. For example, when the writings of Jan Hus were burned after he was convicted of heresy at the Council of Constance (1414-18), it was only copies that were destroyed, while the Pope kept the originals. In other examples, the items that were burnt were ‘lists of errors’ – documents that were created to detail heretical statements that were made by some person. They were actually specifically made in order to be burned.
Emphasis mine! Copies destroyed, the Pope kept original. Well golly gee! That's good! Can I go see those books, Mr. Pope? Oh.. I need to know the exact title of it and it's filing number too? And even then I need to be an ordained scholar of the highest degree? And even then it's 50miles deep into the Secret Archive? I'm totally reassured now!


Have at it! What do you know??
 
Last edited:

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,376
Likes
5,455
#2
I highly question the medieval book burning. Vatican would have never accumulated 50 some miles of bookshelves in its Secret Archives alone. Dang, the Secret Archives catalog alone consists of 35,000 volumes. If all the pagan and other religions books were burnt, what on earth do they have on those 50 miles of bookshelves?

Especially when we consider the official version of book printing which started only in the 15th century. How many handwritten books could they have if literacy was scarce and manual book writing was expensive, and time consuming? At least that’s what the official version states.

In my humble opinion, the burning is a good legend created to make everyone think that things got destroyed. Don’t look for them.

Pretty confident the vaults have text books, scientific content, alchemy pubs, literature remaining from the previous spins of our earthly inhabitants.
 
OP
OP
mythstifieD

mythstifieD

Well-known member
Messages
153
Likes
359
#3
The article I quoted actually mentions that they would burn copies, not originals. The originals would go to the Pope. That actually makes a LOT of sense. The Church was smart enough that completely destroying history, even to themselves, would be foolish. So they instead took it from the people and kept it for themselves.
 

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,376
Likes
5,455
#4
I’m not sure we fully understand how advanced things could be at some point.

If you go to a book shop and buy a book, did you just buy a copy or an original? Why do we assume that they had 20 or whatever copies of a single original, and those copies got burnt? What if they had an industry of book making?

If buy burning copies they mean leaving just one copy of the content, that would make sense to me. Yet, it would be a mere speculation.

I’m just thinking...
 
OP
OP
mythstifieD

mythstifieD

Well-known member
Messages
153
Likes
359
#5
One key point is that word: Heretical. Would a history book be heretical that says the Exodus didn't happen? Burn it!
 

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,376
Likes
5,455
#6
The question I would ask is how many of those books? If they burnt a thousand books, that would have hardly made the history. I don’t buy the accepted idea of all those books being religion related.

And again, what did they consider originals?

And another thing, what would be more damaging, exodus did not happen, or a tech book on building turbines 2,000 years ago? For example that is.
 
OP
OP
mythstifieD

mythstifieD

Well-known member
Messages
153
Likes
359
#7
I think it was under the guise of heresy, but they were really burning anything they didn't want us to know about. So yes, ancient tech and what the pyramids are really for and when they were really built would be charred.

And yes, you make a good point. The scholar in that article naively assumes that the book owner would have originals. Some peasant in the middle ages has an original Aristotle? Give me a break. How could they know an original from a copy?

I think more likely is a guy would come to your house. Take all your books, and burn any duplicates. Would there be an uproar? Sure. What are you going to do about it though? Write a book?
 

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,376
Likes
5,455
#8
It appears those ancients, though we do not really know what ancient means timewise, are denied any type of developed industrial society.

How much of project documentation did a Pantheon or Coliseum require?

I totally agree that under the disguise of religious books they appropriated all sorts of things. I also think that it was not limited to books alone.
 
OP
OP
mythstifieD

mythstifieD

Well-known member
Messages
153
Likes
359
#9
So why were Monks suddenly allowed to start translating Greek and Roman books when before they had no interesting in doing so? The Arabs apparently had a big interest in doing this all along, but in the West we didn't bother? I find that hard to believe. More likely to believe that the West was just as busy doing such work, but for some reason the Church in the middle ages decided to burn a lot of the old books and hide any references to old more superior cultures than the one in power.
 

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,376
Likes
5,455
#10
Were they translating, or were they making stuff up though?

We get this historical info stating monks did this. Taking into consideration all the other lies and misrepresented information, I do not see why they would tell us the truth here.

At the same time the religious establishment was powerful enough in both human and material resources to completely rewrite our history.

So, why do we think they were copying and translating if we have no originals left.

What if they were heavily modifying the real history in the process creating a false one? This way the reason we have no originals would be a mere fact that there were never any originals of these works.

And whatever real originals the history is loosely based on are locked up in Vatican vaults, and other “classified” institutions.
 

parta

Active member
Messages
55
Likes
120
#11
the herbert w armstrong library and many american evangelical sites have this information on them:

An ancient document called the Austrian Chronicle addresses 95 generations of lordship. How authentic this document is has not yet been determined. The last entries in this document were made around AD 1400. The Chronicle makes reference to the noble country of Austria. One coat of arms in ancient Austria was that of Judeisapta-the land of the Jews. The reason is that large numbers of Jews resided there, dating back to ancient times. The Chronicle tells us that Abraham was born in a country known as the “Admirable Land,” headed by a Count Sattan. War broke out between Abraham and the Count, and Abraham was forced to flee in poverty. He fled to an area around the Danube basin, known as Tanau. Portions of Europe were settled through the Danube basin, as it was one of the main entry routes into Europe. The Chronicle tells us that Abraham went back to the Admirable Land after ruling 30 years in Judeispata.


so some evangelicals think the holy land is actually in central europe. archaeologists and geologists might be proving this to be true currently.

the reason you hide something can change over time. first you might want to hide something so that you can loot it. later you hide something because someone might want it back and will fight for it. transferring that place to someplace else and fighting over it there might be a good idea when the real place is in your rear and not out in front. next you hide that place because it remains a symbol and would destroy the convenient divisions that have profited the ugly. i think the big secret is a place where alot of important things happened and our entire civilization has been based on what went on there.

but europe is radioactive in everyones mind. nothing ancient and important happened there. everyone hates the idea of europe being important in the birth of civilization. noone would hear of it for a second. noone can stand it. i would say the efforts of whomever have been very successful.

"When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic."
 

dreamtime

Well-known member
Messages
151
Likes
568
#13
If you go to a book shop and buy a book, did you just buy a copy or an original? Why do we assume that they had 20 or whatever copies of a single original, and those copies got burnt? What if they had an industry of book making?
It always sounds as if there were only like 4 books around and the pope just said "destroy the 3 copies and bring me the original", but it sounds to simplicistic.

What if they had standardized ways of duplicating the knowledge, there wouldn't be an original. The idea of copies/original makes sense in the time when the church started to invent books out of thin air and called them copies of "originals".

They had this big lists of forbidden books and gave them to every inquisitor to just destroy every version they could find. The church just made sure to have a complete index of these books before the hunt began. How would you even make sure to always get the original?

Medieval sources tell us that the main objective was to generate fear. The church wasn't able to burn every single book. But everyone knew the danger of owning a forbidden book, and supposedly this fear led people to voluntary destroy them. We are led to believe in late medieval times the church was so ubiquitous in Europe, that people just followed these orders. Every neighbour could backstab you and tell the church you practice magic or do other forbidden stuff. In fact the church incentiviced this kind of behavior, and when you betray someone else you get to keep a part of their belongings and assets.

So I think the book burning was basically a very sophisticated and concerted effort to make sure people lose the connection to the true knowledge of the past. Just like the Nazis only had a couple of public book burnings, these were enough to generate fear in the public, make people voluntarily destroy certain books, and force a certain kind of behavior.

In times of cataclysmic change or wars, most knowledge is lost without anyone censoring anything. Even the Church had difficulties preserving their librariy through all the turmoils of the 10th - 16th Centuries and they were basically doing everything in their power to preserve it through multiple generations.

Install fear in one generation and all forbidden books of that generation will just disappear within a couple of decades when the old generation dies and the new generation has long forgotten what it's all about.

I wonder if there are still families that have private collections that survived all the censorships. It's definitely an exciting thought to imagine there are a few rich families arround that have kept the connection to their past and actually know that we came straight out of the 'ancient' Roman Empire 500 years ago. But those better keep their mouths shut and enjoy their wealth, as the whole system is streamlined in every way imaginable, there is no resistance. Not anymore.
 
Last edited:

parta

Active member
Messages
55
Likes
120
#14
I wonder if there are still families that have private collections that survived all the censorships. It's definitely an exciting thought to imagine there are a few rich families arround that have kept the connection to their past and actually know that we came straight out of the 'ancient' Roman Empire 500 years ago. But those better keep their mouths shut and enjoy their wealth, as the whole system is streamlined in every way imaginable, there is no resistance. Not anymore.
starting in 1700 they had to survive the book buying armies of the richest man of his time prince eugene of savoy. he had to have every book in existence and it seems they went to every castle, monastery and library with bags of gold.

there is one for you korben. what is prince eugene pointing at in almost all of his official portraits.
 
Last edited:

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,376
Likes
5,455
#15
starting in 1700 they had to survive the book buying armies of the richest man of his time prince eugene of savoy. he had to have every book in existence and it seems they went to every castle, monastery and library with bags of gold.
Peter the Great did a similar thing with russian population family history books around 1700 as well. According to Fomenko and Nosovsky that is.

Only he did not pay. He also did not return the books which were originally collected for the purposes of creating a unified population family history. They all... disappeared.
 

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,376
Likes
5,455
#18
there is one for you korben. what is prince eugene pointing at in almost all of his official portraits.
Totally missed it. Honestly I have no clue what he points at. If I were to guess, may be the outside territories? His got them optics in his hand, or at least I think it is optics.
 

parta

Active member
Messages
55
Likes
120
#20
Yeah.. what is he pointing at??

View attachment 5773
the austrian book that says the holy land was the middle danube basin was very popular in this austrian generals day. the area was what he was fighting with the ottomans over.
he also did some sketchy things related to the trojan war which in some books from his day would have really been the mythically huge ancient city of cornesti ^which he gave to his most trusted general as his personal estate. named the great gates on his city palace after antenor, aeneas and hercules. antenor rebuilt troy by permission of the greeks. aeneas carried his father to safety from troy. hercules was involved in the first trojan war.
and if you want to get crazy with reading just plato and pindar he might think he was pointing at atlantis.

he was a pointing fool.
eugene.png

peace
 
Last edited:
Top