Ark of the covenant and bogus history of the Jewish people

D

Dragon Snacks

Padawan Learner
In Laura's "Secret History of the World...." book, she exposes the Biblical story of the Jews as not being confirmable via other recorded histories or archaeological evidence. I have read that the Ark of the Covenant is not mentioned anywhere but the The Bible, except possibly being alluded to in the Qu'ran.

If the Biblical history of the Jews is in a large part fiction, it would seem that asking questions about the The Ark, it's origin, purpose, etc. would be akin to asking the same kinds of questions about Magic Beans or any other imaginary objects.

The C's, however, confirm the Ark's reality, and that it was in the possession of the Jews:

"Q: (L) Did they, or did they not, have the Ark of the Covenant? Was this given to this group of people by 4th density?
A: Close.
Q: (L) Who was it originally given to?
A: Abraham.
Q: (L) Who gave it to him?
A: Sara.
Q: (L) Is the story of Rachel stealing the household gods from her father may have really been the story of Sara stealing the Ark from Akhenaten?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) No wonder Akhenaten was hot to follow them. He wasn't after Sara, he wanted his Ark back.
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Who gave the Ark to Akhenaten?
A: STS 4th Density."

Here the C's say STS forces created it:

"A: It was finally understood by "Moses" that the danger of the object was greater than the ability of descendants to resist corruption. He handed it over to those who had created it.
Q: (H) Was it STS or STO forces that created it?
A: STS.
Q: (H) So, the Ark was an object created by STS. Did this amount to some sort of realization on Moses' part? Did he start to wake up?
A: Yes. The story of the "contending with the angel" was the significant turning point as well as the moment of return."

But here the C's appear to imply that STS forces are not capable of making an Ark, but it's difficult for me to interpret what exactly they're saying. And they don't directly address the assertion by "R" that STS forces can't make one, they just answer the question about tuning:

"A: This item is tuned by consciousness. It is of such a frequency that STS gifts are not capable of such precision. The range includes multiple possibility vectors. STS operates within a narrow range.

Q: (R) So they can't make it, but they can use it. So they have to find one that is already created. (L) Is that possible? (A) Operated by consciousness. (L)They said tuned not operated. First of all we want to ask whether they mean tuned as in tuned when it was created or as tuned as in using. (A) There is this scenario that they will wait until the STO guy will find it and tune it, and still only then they will jump on 'em. (L) Right. Do you mean tuned as in the tuning of the creation or the tuning of the operation?

A: Creation. "

Based on Laura's research, should we even consider that the Ark might be a real object?

Why do the C's appear to contradict themselves regarding the Ark?

Is the Ark mentioned in any extra-biblical sources? Maybe by another name?
 
It's possible the C's are talking about the Holy Grail, not the Ark, when referring to the STO object. I'm not sure that they are the same thing. Here's more of that session:

C's said:
Q: (L) We were making some theories about this object that VB was looking for - the Ark of the Covenant, or the Holy Grail. [See sessions from March and July of 2000.] I believe that
we understand that this is an object that is of great usefulness, some kind of lensing device. Is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) Is this something that the STS groups - yeah, we know everybody on earth is STS, but I mean the heavy duty ones - had at one time and then lost, or lost control of as we were
speculating earlier?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) How did they lose it?
A: It was not so much "lost" as it was "retrieved" and put away for safe keeping.
Q: (R & L) Who retrieved it?
A: 4th density STO mission.
Q: (L) Who is it that is looking for it? Is it 3rd density STS or 4th density?
A: Both.
Q: (L) If it is a 3rd density device why do 4th density critters want it?
A: It is a trans-density device.
Q: (L) Well if 4th density STS are so technically advanced how come they can't just make another one?
A: This item is tuned by consciousness. It is of such a frequency that STS gifts are not capable of such precision. The range includes multiple possibility vectors. STS operates within
a narrow range.
Click to expand...

It does appear that the terms are being used interchangeably, but it's possible that they may be different things - one made by STO and another by STS. I think I remember Laura talking about this possibility a few years back (but can't find where at the moment), tho I may be wrong. Try looking in earlier forum discussions, articles on Cassiopaea.org, or possibly in the Wave series. I'll look tonight when I have more time, as my brain just won't let go of the idea that there is a difference.
 
Hi Dragon Snacks,

Seeing that you signed up today, I would like to welcome you to the forum and we would appreciate it if you would post a brief introduction about yourself in the Newbies section, telling us how you found this forum, a little bit about yourself, how long you've been reading it and/or the SOTT page, whether or not you've read any of Laura's books yet, etc. Thank you so much.

:)
 
Consider that the "history of the Jews" was stolen from other people.
 
"Consider that the "history of the Jews" was stolen from other people. "

So it seems like it ought to appear in other sources, such as Egyptian history, since it was stolen from Akhenaten. But I'm not familiar with what the Egyptians kept records of and what they didn't.
 
Dragon Snacks said:
"Consider that the "history of the Jews" was stolen from other people. "

So it seems like it ought to appear in other sources, such as Egyptian history, since it was stolen from Akhenaten. But I'm not familiar with what the Egyptians kept records of and what they didn't.
Click to expand...

No, it wasn't stolen from the Egyptians though certainly the Akhenaten scandal was worked into the warp of the fabric. Take a look at Gmirkin's book "Berossus and Genesis, Manetho and Exodus: Hellenistic Histories and the Date of the Pentateuch" and Louden's "Homer's Odyssey and the Near East".

There are several other angles besides just ancient Greek and Mesopotamian such as Orpheus and Pythagoras, and the origins of Rome... just think about the sacred Penates... this Ark appears in a number of guises.

I can say one thing: those Hellenized Jews in Alexandria were creative in their borrowing, if nothing else.
 
"...this Ark appears in a number of guises". As do a great many things it appears, material and otherwise. I guess esoteric or abstract concepts are easier to get ahold of when they are sort of anchored to a material object, like an ancient relic, or a mythical hero.

Thanks for the book recommendations.
 
Dragon Snacks said:
"...this Ark appears in a number of guises". As do a great many things it appears, material and otherwise. I guess esoteric or abstract concepts are easier to get ahold of when they are sort of anchored to a material object, like an ancient relic, or a mythical hero.

Thanks for the book recommendations.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking a lot lately that a lot of so-called "esoteric concepts" were created much later and retro-jected onto quite plain and straightforward physical events. Another very useful book to read is Wilken's "Where Troy Once Stood".

THE story of a great destruction and the fleeing of survivors is the story of Troy. Aeneas supposedly saved his father and the Penates and ended up in Italy. THE story of the great appeaser of the gods at the time of this destruction is the story of Orpheus whose student was Mousaios. Orphism (so they say) revives in Italy with Pythagoras. THE CITY for hundreds of years of our ancient history was ROME and being Roman was to be "chosen". All of these concepts were combined together by later Hellenized Jews to "create" their "history" and religion.
 
Just to give you a few more clues, during the Hellenistic period, many individuals engaged in "figuring out the world", (mainly Stoics at this point), were interested in the Orphic stories, legends, rites, etc. So there was a lot of this being written down and passed around. One version of the Orphic "Hymn to Zeus" is found in a papyrus fragment, an anthology of poetry, dating to the 2nd century BC.

A revised and expanded version of the Hymn shows up in the "Testament of Orpheus" which is the alleged recantation of Polytheism by Orpheus, and his adoption of Monotheism. This work was composed by a Hellenistic Jewish pseudepigrapher possibly as early as the 3rd century, right around the time that the Septuagint was being translated written.

Apparently, the Jewish Orphicists developed the idea of Zeus as supreme deity and turned it into apologetics for the Jewish monotheistic tradition which they were, at that time, attempting to reconcile with Greek philosophical and religious traditions. This "Hymn to Zeus" gave them a way to borrow authority for Jewish tradition by recasting it as Orpheus' recognition of the supreme god.

It is suggested by some scholars that the individual who did this was Aristobulus of Paneas (2nd century BC). Gmirkin devotes a section to deconstructing his nonsense.

In any event, the text (whoever wrote it) is preserved in several forms by the later Christian apologists who used it as ammunition in their polemics against the Greek polytheism.

Around the same time, the figure of Orpheus was appropriated by these Hellenized Jews through a wordplay on the name of Orpheus' pupil/son Mousaios who is reinterpreted as Moses the comparably great revelatory figure of invented Jewish history.

According to Eusebius, a certain Artapanus relates in his treatise "on the Jews", that Moses was formerly called Mousaios by the Greeks and was the teacher of Orpheus. This is a clue to the deliberate inversion of the more ancient relationship between Orpheus and Mousaios, making Orpheus dependent on Moses/Mousaios which was a blatant maneuver to privilege the Jewish tradition over the Greek.

The tradition of Orpheus' journey to Egypt, recorded in Diodorus (between 60 and 30 BC), provided the opportunity to bring the two figures together in some unspecified time in the past, thus coordinating the origins of both the Greek and Jewish traditions but putting the Greek religious tradition in debt to Moses.

"She being barren took a supposititious child from one of the Jews, and called him Mouses; but by the Greeks he was called, when grown to manhood, Mousaios. And this Moses, they said, was the teacher of Orpheus; and when grown up he taught mankind many useful things. Fore he was the inventor of ships, and machines for laying stones, and Egyptian arms, and engines for drawing water and for war, and invented philosophy." ~ Fragments of the Greek Historians 726 F 3 ap. Eusebius Præparatio Evangelica ix. 18, 23, 27 9.27.
Click to expand...

However, when reading the fragments and traditions carefully, one gets the strong impression that the Egypt spoken of by the ancients was NOT the same Egypt that was known by that name after Alexander. Again, see Wilkens. The transposition of names of places to places where refugees from cataclysm "landed" has created a huge problem in sorting out the most ancient references from the later.

The Christian apologists picked up on the Jewish manipulation of Moses/Mousaios as the teacher of Orpheus to privilege the Biblical tradition over the Greek as well.

Regarding Artapanus, cited by Eusebius, it seems that the oldest citation of Artapanus that is known is from Alexander Polyhistor in the middle of the 1st century BC. Polyhistor’s writings have not survived though fragments have been preserved in the books of Eusebius and Clement.

There's a so-so bit about Artapanas on wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artapanus_of_Alexandria - as usual, caveat lector. You need to do your own digging into the sources. Edmonds and Burkert are more even-handed in their treatment of such matters and thus their bibliographies are worth more.
 
Getting back to the Ark of the Covenant. As I mentioned, consider the Penates (supposedly wooden cult figures and/or the sacred fire) carried away from burning Troy by Aeneas and his little group.

Another thing that comes to mind is the ARGO and the search for the "Golden Fleece". Now that's a rabbit hole!
 
Laura said:
"She being barren took a supposititious child from one of the Jews, and called him Mouses; but by the Greeks he was called, when grown to manhood, Mousaios. And this Moses, they said, was the teacher of Orpheus; and when grown up he taught mankind many useful things. Fore he was the inventor of ships, and machines for laying stones, and Egyptian arms, and engines for drawing water and for war, and invented philosophy." ~ Fragments of the Greek Historians 726 F 3 ap. Eusebius Præparatio Evangelica ix. 18, 23, 27 9.27.
Click to expand...

However, when reading the fragments and traditions carefully, one gets the strong impression that the Egypt spoken of by the ancients was NOT the same Egypt that was known by that name after Alexander. Again, see Wilkens. The transposition of names of places to places where refugees from cataclysm "landed" has created a huge problem in sorting out the most ancient references from the later.

The Christian apologists picked up on the Jewish manipulation of Moses/Mousaios as the teacher of Orpheus to privilege the Biblical tradition over the Greek as well.
Click to expand...

In reading your post, Laura, it dawned on me that perhaps the Druids did pass on their knowledge in written form. They just happened to all of a sudden have Greek names due to the exodus after the Trojan war and resettling in the Greek Islands, and thus the Greeks have been given credit for what was Celtic druid knowledge and inventions. It is a tangled web for sure.
 
Don't get excited here. I'm still looking for any signs of a passed on REAL tradition. Mostly what I see are comet stories that morphed into myths and then were taken by the NeoPlatonists and turned into some kind of hidden religious system that never existed as they formulated it. There is ONE thing, though, a continuous thread of the "human cosmic connection". Repeated emphasis on "acting nasty makes the gods angry" and appeasing the gods so they won't destroy everyone and everything again. That comes through loud and clear! So, if that was the teachings of the Druids, maybe so.
 
Came across an idea from Frank O'Collins that got my attention a while ago. He was basically saying that Judaism was constructed by Rome, around Vespasian's and Titus' reign as a religion for the elite. It was a religion that gave divine (dei) right to rule (Ius) as masters over slaves. So it was called "Iu-deism" and now Judaism. There's an obvious connection between that Latin root word that makes "judge" / "juristriction" etc. and "Judaism" "Judea". That's clearly not evidence but it sparked my curiosity.

Is that a completely crazy idea or is there any merit to it? Just curious what anyone thinks about it?
 
alkhemst said:
Came across an idea from Frank O'Collins that got my attention a while ago. He was basically saying that Judaism was constructed by Rome, around Vespasian's and Titus' reign as a religion for the elite. It was a religion that gave divine (dei) right to rule (Ius) as masters over slaves. So it was called "Iu-deism" and now Judaism. There's an obvious connection between that Latin root word that makes "judge" / "juristriction" etc. and "Judaism" "Judea". That's clearly not evidence but it sparked my curiosity.

Is that a completely crazy idea or is there any merit to it? Just curious what anyone thinks about it?
Click to expand...

Where does he lay out his evidence? Is it compelling?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom