Archaeology contradicts the Old Testament. Why that?
Martin Luther started protestant revolution with accusation of Papal conspiracy in the matter of Constantine’s testament, take good note that Martin Luther was right and the testament was false . Martin had as media outlet nothing better than the doors of the Wittenberg’s cathedral. Dan Brown has mass media at his disposal. The Roman Catholic Church, for instance, is involved in a much greater hoax than the most daring writer could possibly conceive of - one that deals with the very foundations of history itself. The above statement is neither an exaggeration, nor a metaphor - very few people are aware that the B C A D chronology as we know it was created by a handful of Jesuits in the 16th 17th century - Joseph Scaliger, Dionysius Petavius and their successors. The entire conception of ancient and mediaeval history know to us today owes its existence to a XVI century Jesuit hoax. To access TOC, Search Inside or excerpt click on AMAZON.COM link in TrueChronology channel.
The consensual history insists that all the events concerning the Biblical patriarchs occurred precisely and exclusively on the territory of the modern Mesopotamia and Syria. Nevertheless, it is immediately acknowledged that “as to what concerns the identity of the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the result of the most fruitful excavations in Syria and Mesopotamia was extremely meagre, or simply nonexistent”.One might wonder just how justifiable it is to search for traces of the Biblical patriarchs in modern Mesopotamia.Archaeology can find no proof to the Biblical legend about the Egyptian slavery of the Jews.The research concerning the Pharaoh under whose rule Israel moved into Egypt and left it represents nothing but the juggling of names and dates void of all meaning. Could an altogether different country be described by the name of Egypt? To access TOC, Search Inside, reviews or excerpt click on AMAZON.COM link in TrueChronology channel.
Technorati Tags: newark airport, Archaeology, contradicts, the, Old, Testament, Why, that
Archaeology contradicts the Old Testament. Why that?
The consensual history insists that all the events concerning the Biblical patriarchs occurred precisely and exclusively on the territory of the modern Mesopotamia and Syria. Nevertheless, it is immediately acknowledged that “as to what concerns the identity of the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the result of the most fruitful excavations in Syria and Mesopotamia was extremely meagre, or simply nonexistent”.One might wonder just how justifiable it is to search for traces of the Biblical patriarchs in modern Mesopotamia.Archaeology can find no proof to the Biblical legend about the Egyptian slavery of the Jews.The research concerning the Pharaoh under whose rule Israel moved into Egypt and left it represents nothing but the juggling of names and dates void of all meaning. Could an altogether different country be described by the name of Egypt? To access TOC, Search Inside, reviews or excerpt click on AMAZON.COM link in TrueChronology channel.
Technorati Tags: newark airport, Archaeology, contradicts, the, Old, Testament, Why, that
<< Home