I have read many books by Formenko. What I know now, is that the datings of our history are illusional. When it comes to ancient Greece I do believe, that it was, what the call the middle age.
The theory is that after Jesus Christ mankind prospered and we realized the apex of human civilization and now the millennial kingdom of Christ has ended and satan is unchained and on the loose in the world and we cannot build anything great and as inspired as our previous civilizations (Rome, Greece, etc)
Tristan's thesis sounds like lunacy until you actually see his presentation of the evidence. I can take it a step further and cement it with some even larger issues.
Tristan refers to this very consistent 1800 year gap, which he places between (what we are now calling) 500 BC and 1300 AD. The first question we should ask is, "Why 1800 years?" That question might then devolve into, "Is there something special about the years 500 BC and 1300 AD?" The answer is yes, there is.
First, to put a finer point on it, these are not particular years that we can single out, at least for now, but approximate special times. Second, it would be better to talk about the 1800 year gap between 600 BC and 1200 AD. What is special about those times?
Fomenko himself tells us about the more recent one. In his book, "Tsar of the Slavs", he makes the case that the Jesus was the historical figure Andronikos I Komnenos.
One item I would add to his case--because I don't think Fomenko is quite this conspiratorial--is that Andronikos is said to have been tortured for three days and finally died on the 12th of September, 1185 AD. That's according to wiki, but you'll find other sources saying he died on 9/11. The real Jesus was put to death on 9/11? A disturbing coincidence, if you think this was just a coincidence.
The beginning of the 1800 year- gap coincides with something known as the Axial Age. They don't put it this way, but the human race suddenly "woke up". There is far, far more evidence and related events than is mentioned in the wiki writeup.
So what went on in 600 BC that fundamentally changed history and the human race itself? That's a much longer story--like book-length--but it has to do with the Anunnaki, the real identity of Satan, and the nature of human consciousness. But then I did say it cemented some larger issues.
I wish there was a place I could point you towards where it was all synthesized into a coherent picture, but it was original research and I've never gotten around to writing it up in a single place. And I've not yet come across anyone else who has put any of these big pieces together. But aside from the main pieces already mentioned, I'll throw in two more researchers (with caveats) plus an Easter egg.
First would be Zechariah Sitchin. Interestingly, I've never read more than a paragraph of his work. When I began, I knew that his main conclusion was that these "ancient astronauts" called the Anunnaki had visited Earth. As I dove into it bit by bit, I came to realize I was coming independently to all the same conclusions he did. Hard to believe that's chance or error, right? So then, as far as I know, by reading his work you can get the basic picture of the Anunnaki much faster and much better than when I took the long way.
The caveat is this: you'll see every shill and his brother blackwashing Sitchin every time his name comes up. Once you realize that the Anunnaki are a big part of the overall truth, you'll understand why They don't want people studying them.
Worse is that all of the prominent Anunnaki researchers--and I could name a dozen--sooner or later devolve into nonsense and bullshit. Most of them are sooner, and this is why they're allowed to talk about the Anunnaki at all. It's its own form of disinformation.
The other researcher is Mauro Biglino. His main line of research is meticulously correcting the bogus translations of the Old Testament so that we can see it was actually written about certain human interactions with the Anunnaki. It's quite stunning how many issues and mysteries that clears up.
Because of the very sensitive religious nature of it, he was always cagey about declaring exactly who the "Elohim" were, but in a couple of his presentations he briefly mentions Sitchin and the Anunnaki. But far worse, a couple of years ago he was apparently "turned". In his interview by Graham Hancock, you'll see he is forced to say that the "Elohim" were only human kings. It's sad and painful to watch.
So here's the Easter egg: My crazy-sounding claim is that Satan was one of the Anunnaki and that he took over the Earth (for some period of time) starting at what we now call 600 BC. Well, somebody somewhere knows that too, or at least knows something about it.
You may have heard of the Lucis Trust (formerly the Lucifer Trust) who are the publishers for the UN. All very sus just from that alone, right? Here's what it says on their page about...
You know, the true nature of Jesus is something I've never really tried to get to the bottom of. Two things: the evidence is somewhat murky, and so many people have their ideas about Jesus set in stone. When there's clear evidence regarding other related topics such as we have been discussing that people have such a hard time processing, there didn't seem much sense trying to pin down who Jesus was.
But with the question being raised, if we think in terms of attempting to explain evidence, off the top of my head there are several areas related to him that are seldom discussed and would point towards who he really was:
The dates is his birth and death, as discussed in "Tsar of the Slavs" would cement the idea that he was a real person. Anyone adhering to the idea that he was a fictional character would have to think all that evidence was mere coincidence.
There's the strange fact that demons possessing people in the New Testament recognized him. Again, this speaks against the text being some made up nonsense. Who would make that up? Longer story, but demons seem to be the discarnate spirits of Nephilim, and Nephilim in turn seem to be the offspring of Anunnaki and human women. So we get tied back in to the idea that Jesus was connected in some fashion to the Anunnaki.
There the famous passage where Jesus says he is "not of this world". Well, someone who is in some way alien would say that, wouldn't he? More to the point is this: when Jesus says he is from "above", he uses the Greek word "ano". This is nearly identical with the Sumerian word "anu". This was a synonym for "heaven" but came originally from An or Anu, who was the king of the Sumerian gods. We're tied in again very closely to the Anunnaki (<- see the use of "Anu" again, since that term means "those who from the heavens came to Earth"?)
We also find events such as the Transfiguration of Jesus. If someone thinks Jesus was just a man, or Jesus was God, or Jesus did not exist, then this is simply baffling. If you start with the idea that Jesus had some relation to this race of powerful aliens, then maybe there's a way we can make sense of this incident (although I as yet do not know what that is).
So as far as mainstream views of any stripe, I guess you would say that I do not hold that he was man, or god, or fictional. Interestingly, if you hold with the view that "They" sometimes reveal their knowledge in popular media, you may be interested in this video:
It is revealed that the powerful aliens took a human, educated him to be a "savior" or teacher of some type, and sent him back to the human race. The humans punished and killed this educator. Well... sound familiar?
Recall that in the New Testament, Jesus disappeared for 18 years, between the ages of 12 and 30, before he began his ministry. If someone was going to make up the New Testament for any reason imaginable, why would they leave this out? Maybe it's because there was a real Jesus and he was.., not around.
Intriguing stuff, isn't it? However high my opinion of myself is, I tell you I could not possibly begin to make all this up.
No, I've never heard of a single piece of evidence that's turned up.
You'll hear people speculate--and speculation is all it is--that Jesus was being trained in this or that or several schools of various types, everything from the Essenes to the Hindus to the Egyptian mysteries. TBH, that sounds about right to me, but then again for all I know he was taken up in a flying saucer and educated by the Anunnaki on a space station. You never want to let speculation cut you off from discovering the truth.
On the flip side, and I think these are very important points, all those long crucial missing years speak strongly to two things:
(1) That the New Testament was not made up out of nothing. Why would anyone make up a story with the whole middle of it missing? And anyone that claims the NT is fake never brings up their own explanation for this.
(2) Those years really were important and have been purposely hidden from us. The NT has all this carefully chronicled information about his childhood, then all this carefully chronicled information about his final three years. You'd think someone would have written a short book saying, "Then this guy just took off one day with sandals and a backpack, off to the south is all anyone knows, and then he never even wrote home." Nope, it's exactly like someone just cut the pages of the middle chapters out of a book.
a) One can only turn within motion...motion isn't certain (affixed).
b) HE BREW within motion HIS STORY as a certainty within ones consenting mind, which only then permits the overturning of certainties.
subversive hypothesis
The one consenting to a suggestion positions self under (sub) a turning spell (verse/verto) and under (hypo) a proposition (thesis) by another.
real history
Reality isn't his store (stock) but his supply. Fiction tempts one to ignore supplied reality (perceivable) for stocking fiction (suggested) within self.
different source
Same source (all perceivable) different resolution (ones perception)...many consenting to suggestions by few; equalizes differences, while establishing different sources.
I have read many books by Formenko. What I know now, is that the datings of our history are illusional. When it comes to ancient Greece I do believe, that it was, what the call the middle age.
Did The Millennial Kingdom (1000 Year Reign of Jesus after Tribulation) Already Happen? https://communities.win/c/Christian/p/17te0QqJMO/did-the-millennial-kingdom-1000-/c
The theory is that after Jesus Christ mankind prospered and we realized the apex of human civilization and now the millennial kingdom of Christ has ended and satan is unchained and on the loose in the world and we cannot build anything great and as inspired as our previous civilizations (Rome, Greece, etc)
Original:
RE-DATING ANCIENT GREECE by Sylvain Tristan https://sylvaintristan.wixsite.com/ancient-greece/the-book
Tristan's thesis sounds like lunacy until you actually see his presentation of the evidence. I can take it a step further and cement it with some even larger issues.
Tristan refers to this very consistent 1800 year gap, which he places between (what we are now calling) 500 BC and 1300 AD. The first question we should ask is, "Why 1800 years?" That question might then devolve into, "Is there something special about the years 500 BC and 1300 AD?" The answer is yes, there is.
First, to put a finer point on it, these are not particular years that we can single out, at least for now, but approximate special times. Second, it would be better to talk about the 1800 year gap between 600 BC and 1200 AD. What is special about those times?
Fomenko himself tells us about the more recent one. In his book, "Tsar of the Slavs", he makes the case that the Jesus was the historical figure Andronikos I Komnenos.
One item I would add to his case--because I don't think Fomenko is quite this conspiratorial--is that Andronikos is said to have been tortured for three days and finally died on the 12th of September, 1185 AD. That's according to wiki, but you'll find other sources saying he died on 9/11. The real Jesus was put to death on 9/11? A disturbing coincidence, if you think this was just a coincidence.
The beginning of the 1800 year- gap coincides with something known as the Axial Age. They don't put it this way, but the human race suddenly "woke up". There is far, far more evidence and related events than is mentioned in the wiki writeup.
So what went on in 600 BC that fundamentally changed history and the human race itself? That's a much longer story--like book-length--but it has to do with the Anunnaki, the real identity of Satan, and the nature of human consciousness. But then I did say it cemented some larger issues.
Sweet. Can you recommend some reading/videos?
I wish there was a place I could point you towards where it was all synthesized into a coherent picture, but it was original research and I've never gotten around to writing it up in a single place. And I've not yet come across anyone else who has put any of these big pieces together. But aside from the main pieces already mentioned, I'll throw in two more researchers (with caveats) plus an Easter egg.
First would be Zechariah Sitchin. Interestingly, I've never read more than a paragraph of his work. When I began, I knew that his main conclusion was that these "ancient astronauts" called the Anunnaki had visited Earth. As I dove into it bit by bit, I came to realize I was coming independently to all the same conclusions he did. Hard to believe that's chance or error, right? So then, as far as I know, by reading his work you can get the basic picture of the Anunnaki much faster and much better than when I took the long way.
The caveat is this: you'll see every shill and his brother blackwashing Sitchin every time his name comes up. Once you realize that the Anunnaki are a big part of the overall truth, you'll understand why They don't want people studying them.
Worse is that all of the prominent Anunnaki researchers--and I could name a dozen--sooner or later devolve into nonsense and bullshit. Most of them are sooner, and this is why they're allowed to talk about the Anunnaki at all. It's its own form of disinformation.
The other researcher is Mauro Biglino. His main line of research is meticulously correcting the bogus translations of the Old Testament so that we can see it was actually written about certain human interactions with the Anunnaki. It's quite stunning how many issues and mysteries that clears up.
Because of the very sensitive religious nature of it, he was always cagey about declaring exactly who the "Elohim" were, but in a couple of his presentations he briefly mentions Sitchin and the Anunnaki. But far worse, a couple of years ago he was apparently "turned". In his interview by Graham Hancock, you'll see he is forced to say that the "Elohim" were only human kings. It's sad and painful to watch.
So here's the Easter egg: My crazy-sounding claim is that Satan was one of the Anunnaki and that he took over the Earth (for some period of time) starting at what we now call 600 BC. Well, somebody somewhere knows that too, or at least knows something about it.
You may have heard of the Lucis Trust (formerly the Lucifer Trust) who are the publishers for the UN. All very sus just from that alone, right? Here's what it says on their page about...
The Christ - Lucis Trust
You cannot find a single place on their site where they explain how they come up with that date. But I know and now you do too.
Thanks for your interest, and never hesitate if you have any questions!
Very cool. Will check it out.
Out of curiosity, do you have any theories on Jesus, that differ from anything "mainstream"?
You know, the true nature of Jesus is something I've never really tried to get to the bottom of. Two things: the evidence is somewhat murky, and so many people have their ideas about Jesus set in stone. When there's clear evidence regarding other related topics such as we have been discussing that people have such a hard time processing, there didn't seem much sense trying to pin down who Jesus was.
But with the question being raised, if we think in terms of attempting to explain evidence, off the top of my head there are several areas related to him that are seldom discussed and would point towards who he really was:
The dates is his birth and death, as discussed in "Tsar of the Slavs" would cement the idea that he was a real person. Anyone adhering to the idea that he was a fictional character would have to think all that evidence was mere coincidence.
There's the strange fact that demons possessing people in the New Testament recognized him. Again, this speaks against the text being some made up nonsense. Who would make that up? Longer story, but demons seem to be the discarnate spirits of Nephilim, and Nephilim in turn seem to be the offspring of Anunnaki and human women. So we get tied back in to the idea that Jesus was connected in some fashion to the Anunnaki.
There the famous passage where Jesus says he is "not of this world". Well, someone who is in some way alien would say that, wouldn't he? More to the point is this: when Jesus says he is from "above", he uses the Greek word "ano". This is nearly identical with the Sumerian word "anu". This was a synonym for "heaven" but came originally from An or Anu, who was the king of the Sumerian gods. We're tied in again very closely to the Anunnaki (<- see the use of "Anu" again, since that term means "those who from the heavens came to Earth"?)
We also find events such as the Transfiguration of Jesus. If someone thinks Jesus was just a man, or Jesus was God, or Jesus did not exist, then this is simply baffling. If you start with the idea that Jesus had some relation to this race of powerful aliens, then maybe there's a way we can make sense of this incident (although I as yet do not know what that is).
So as far as mainstream views of any stripe, I guess you would say that I do not hold that he was man, or god, or fictional. Interestingly, if you hold with the view that "They" sometimes reveal their knowledge in popular media, you may be interested in this video:
Deleted Engineer Dialogue FULLY TRANSLATED from the Script of Prometheus
It is revealed that the powerful aliens took a human, educated him to be a "savior" or teacher of some type, and sent him back to the human race. The humans punished and killed this educator. Well... sound familiar?
Recall that in the New Testament, Jesus disappeared for 18 years, between the ages of 12 and 30, before he began his ministry. If someone was going to make up the New Testament for any reason imaginable, why would they leave this out? Maybe it's because there was a real Jesus and he was.., not around.
Intriguing stuff, isn't it? However high my opinion of myself is, I tell you I could not possibly begin to make all this up.
Very interesting.
Are there any writings about what went on from 18-30?
No, I've never heard of a single piece of evidence that's turned up.
You'll hear people speculate--and speculation is all it is--that Jesus was being trained in this or that or several schools of various types, everything from the Essenes to the Hindus to the Egyptian mysteries. TBH, that sounds about right to me, but then again for all I know he was taken up in a flying saucer and educated by the Anunnaki on a space station. You never want to let speculation cut you off from discovering the truth.
On the flip side, and I think these are very important points, all those long crucial missing years speak strongly to two things:
(1) That the New Testament was not made up out of nothing. Why would anyone make up a story with the whole middle of it missing? And anyone that claims the NT is fake never brings up their own explanation for this.
(2) Those years really were important and have been purposely hidden from us. The NT has all this carefully chronicled information about his childhood, then all this carefully chronicled information about his final three years. You'd think someone would have written a short book saying, "Then this guy just took off one day with sandals and a backpack, off to the south is all anyone knows, and then he never even wrote home." Nope, it's exactly like someone just cut the pages of the middle chapters out of a book.
Maybe they're in the Vatican archives!
a) One can only turn within motion...motion isn't certain (affixed).
b) HE BREW within motion HIS STORY as a certainty within ones consenting mind, which only then permits the overturning of certainties.
The one consenting to a suggestion positions self under (sub) a turning spell (verse/verto) and under (hypo) a proposition (thesis) by another.
Reality isn't his store (stock) but his supply. Fiction tempts one to ignore supplied reality (perceivable) for stocking fiction (suggested) within self.
Same source (all perceivable) different resolution (ones perception)...many consenting to suggestions by few; equalizes differences, while establishing different sources.