Richard Stanley

Administrator
I suspect that 'Arthur' is pretty much as previously discussed, ironically a bit like what we believe happened for the gospel Jesus. That an historical person was used to drape an embellished narrative atop later on.

Whether this is part of something that goes back to Japheth, or the equivalent, I don't know. But I would not discount that based upon my premise.

In any case, it seems clear that the archaeology reveals that there was no Anglo-Saxon invasion, but rather a long period of peaceful immigration (before such things as the notions of nations and feudal kingdoms and serfdom), where such immigrants composed from 10 to 15% of the populace. This was gone into with greater detail in the prior episodes of the series. Part 1 and Part 2

Also, it seems that the Christianity that was there, before the arrival of the Roman Church, was some form of Gnosticism, as told by the archaeological motifs discovered (floor mosaics and such). From what I understood, they are claiming this is a separate phenomenon from the so-called Celtic Church, but I might be wrong here.

Yet another archaeological series discussed excavations at legendary Tintagel, and linked the site to prosperous tin trade with various Mediterranean places, a main one in the region of Antioch and Cilicia. This is as close as it gets, sea wise, to such as Edessa. And so, these collective finds show the Romans abandoning Britain (410 CE), but the region not only survives but generally thrives, in fact it seems to maintain a rather high level of culture for some time, and cosmopolitan at that. And then the Roman Church arrives.

The original strata of the Arthurian story provides a foundational mythos history for Britain based upon an alleged invasion by the Anglo-Saxons. And then the later Templar scribes turn it all into a romantic epic, where the bits of Christology 'ironically' reappear.

 

Seeker

Active Member
Also, it seems that the Christianity that was there, before the arrival of the Roman Church, was some form of Gnosticism
Originating from the "Gnostic" Jesus exiled to England, who supposedly had the "Gnostic" twin Judas Thomas, author of the "Gnostic" Gospel of Thomas?
 

Seeker

Active Member
I also notice in the old stories that "Jesus" was supposed to be related to Joseph of Arimathea through his mother, and "King Arthur" was supposed to be descended from Joseph through his mother. Joseph of Arimathea, of course, was supposed to have brought the "Holy Grail" to England. By appealing to Titus to have Jesus taken down from the cross, and instead eventually exiled to England (in the Ellis "gospel"), was Joseph(us) thus responsible for bringing the human representation of the Holy Grail (Jesus) to England after all?
 

Seeker

Active Member
Queen Elizabeth I certainly believed that Christianity was in England before the arrival of the Roman Church. The following is from her 1559 reply (in no uncertain terms!) to some English Bishops who wanted to continue Queen Mary's pro-Catholic policies:

"And whereas you hit us and our subjects in the teeth that the Romish Church first planted the Catholic within our realm, the records and chronicles of our realm testify the contrary; and your own Romish idolatry maketh you liars; witness the ancient monument of Gildas unto which both foreign and domestic have gone in pilgrimage there to offer. This author testifieth Joseph of Arimathea to be the first preacher of the word of God within our realms. Long after that, when Austin came from Rome, this our realm had bishops and priests therein"
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
By appealing to Titus to have Jesus taken down from the cross, and instead eventually exiled to England (in the Ellis "gospel"), was Joseph(us) thus responsible for bringing the human representation of the Holy Grail (Jesus) to England after all?
As we've seen, there seems to be more and more evidence making this 'generally' possible, covered by layers of obfuscation. And, 'specifically', the grail has a large number of interpretations as to what it is. It is the bloodline, a chalice cup, an iron bearing meteorite or the crater made by such ...

If the latter, as Randall Carlson suggests, then such and the symbolic representations (like the cup) of same appear to be catastrophically apocalyptic in nature, and would lend some coherence to seemingly disparate matters.
 

Seeker

Active Member
I see, and if Jesus was connected to the original Grail, he would have also been connected to the "apocalyptic" fall of Jerusalem in AD 70, according to the "revised gospel".
 
As we've seen, there seems to be more and more evidence making this 'generally' possible, covered by layers of obfuscation. And, 'specifically', the grail has a large number of interpretations as to what it is. It is the bloodline, a chalice cup, an iron bearing meteorite or the crater made by such ...
A crater, you say? Can you elaborate?

BTW: another view is that the Grail is the vulva of the Grail Princess.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Yes, if you watch Carlson's videos, he has some on the esoteric meaning of the Arthurian corpus. Here, according to Carlson, it is all cryptically referring back to the catastrophic impacts that lead to the Younger Dryas Period that delayed the onset of the current Holocene Warm Period. Hence the reverence for meteoritic rocks, as displayed by such as Elagabalus and the later Muslims, etc..

Such can be linked to slaying dragons and various zodiological aspects, like the (constellation) Crater/Krater, and the Eagle, and ...

In my 9/11 analysis, I developed an interpretation of the Crater in explaining why Jesus got mad at a barren fig tree, based upon a story from Greek mythology. It wasn't his 'time', but rather Vespasian's and Titus's.
 
In my 9/11 analysis, I developed an interpretation of the Crater in explaining why Jesus got mad at a barren fig tree, based upon a story from Greek mythology. It wasn't his 'time', but rather Vespasian's and Titus's.
I went back and reread your 911 astronomy piece but still don't see a connection between Krater and the Grail. Sure, it's a cup but it's not fetishized to the extent of the Grail. I thought you were saying a meteorite had left a crater that was somehow fashioned into an object.

The question I had at the end of that piece was how this correspondence could have come to be. I don't want to think the stellar alignment somehow caused such a specific event. So was there some massive occult conspiracy to enact this singular display? And for what?

And BTW: I enjoyed your aside into The Pet Goat. In Junior High I was trained to read "the fast way" but that does not appear to be what was going on in that classroom. Mine was called "controlled reading" and used special projectors to force you to absorb the text almost subliminally with no pause for evaluation or contextualization.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Oh, I guess I further developed the connection between Ovid's story and Jesus elsewhere, maybe on the forum postings? But that only went as far as relating it to Jesus and the fig tree, not all the way to the Grail. I just linked them all together here, today.

The question I had at the end of that piece was how this correspondence could have come to be. I don't want to think the stellar alignment somehow caused such a specific event. So was there some massive occult conspiracy to enact this singular display? And for what?
You mean the thrust of the 9/11 article, the alignment that day?

If so, no I do not believe the alignment caused anything at all. Yes, I think it was an occulted conspiracy. The day was meant as a marker event for the initiated, letting them know that the millennial series of events was set in motion, as I further discuss in Part 1 of Apocalypse How. Unfortunately, I have not gotten around to Parts 2 and 3, and likely may not short of a miracle, which don't exist. Apocalypse How is about the history of millennialism and why everyone should be concerned that such manipulations are foisted upon us. For the religious fundamentalists, they see it as validating their blind faith and thus enables their bloody political support for the cynical manipulators of such.

As such, this is stage magic writ large on a global stage.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
I don't want to think the stellar alignment somehow caused such a specific event.
I should add a caveat to my prior comment in that now it appears fact that the combinatorial alignment of the planets, especially certain ones, directly impact the Sun's (Apollo, Helios, Aton, Sol Invictus, Mithra, etc.) activities, i.e. Sun Spots, CME's, etc. That is, unless the planets' orbits are not instead a 'dynamo' function of solar and cosmic phenomenon. I suspect the former proposition and not the latter.

In any case, there is very little that I have written on Postflaviana that I do not see as part of one piece. In this regard, the continuation of Apocalypse How was, among other things, to explain how today's 'Protestant' Evangelical fundamentalism and its emphasis on Futurist End Times is a direct product of Jesuit efforts since the founding of that order about 500 years ago. They simultaneously created the Futurist and Preterist Schools of End Times Eschatology and implanted Futurism into hillbilly Christianity, using a propagation technique called Entryism.

Thus, the Preterist Christ could achieve the apocalypse in 70 CE, while he does the same in 2070 CE, if he (or his human creators) desires to stick to a schedule. And yes, they did so in 1070 CE as well.

Identically, I examined the alignment of 9/23/17 and found it to be, by far, the only alignment that precisely matches that of Revelation 12, where the virgin gives birth to the new savior, and the time period of 3.5 years is repeatedly referred to variously. Nothing supernatural here either.
 

Seeker

Active Member
You are a good grasshopper.
Thank You, it comes from my "Locust" ancestry, remember your older reply to me "Art thou the Son of Manu foretold unto us?". We do seem to agree however about the following
if Jesus was connected to the original Grail, he would have also been connected to the "apocalyptic" fall of Jerusalem in AD 70,
Thus, the Preterist Christ could achieve the apocalypse in 70 CE
I, too, believe in the significance of dates aligning with timetables of events, and that there is a "Master Plan" for all of this, as even the Bible tells us that "To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven" (Ecclesiastes 3:1).
 

Seeker

Active Member
Hence the reverence for meteoritic rocks, as displayed by such as Elagabalus
Which may have wound up at Deva Victrix, where "Jesus/Arthur" lived, and who may have been the ancestor of Elagabalus, thus enshrining the Grail as both a stone and a bloodline, and as an apocalyptic harbinger of the fall of Jerusalem at the time of Jesus, the "human" Grail symbol whose "rock" was Peter of victorious Rome, and also of the fall of the Severan dynasty at the time of his descendant Elagabalus, with the "meteorite" Grail symbol. This is starting to remind me of the "Spear of Destiny", supposedly used by a Roman soldier upon Jesus at his crucifixion, and another harbinger of great evil or good.
 

Seeker

Active Member
Thus, the Preterist Christ could achieve the apocalypse in 70 CE, while he does the same in 2070 CE, if he (or his human creators) desires to stick to a schedule. And yes, they did so in 1070 CE as well.
If I am understanding Ellis correctly, he believes the birth year of Jesus was 14 AD, based upon the statement of Irenaeus that Jesus was born about the 41st year of the reign of Augustus, which began in 27 BC. However, some historians believe the actual reign of Augustus should be counted from 31 BC, when the then Octavian defeated Mark Antony and Cleopatra at the Battle of Actium, and was actually the sole ruler of the Roman world from then on, with 27 BC being the year that his rule was formalized and he received the title of "Augustus". If this assertion is correct , then Jesus would have been born 4 years earlier, about 10 AD, which Ellis believes is the Beginning of the Age of Pisces, thus making Jesus the harbinger of the New Age, along with those following apocalypses, and vastly increasing his significance to the Elite timetable. As I had mentioned previously, a new "Jesus" being born on Sept. 23, 2017, also has an Augustan correlation, as Augustus himself was born on Sept. 23, 63 BC.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Those are interesting ideas for sure. I'll have to go back and see what Ellis's rationale was for linking 'Jesus' birth to Augustus' reign. And I've never come across anything definitive for how to assign an alpha and omega date to the zodical ages. It would be interesting to read the rationale for Dionysius Exiguus to determine the year Zero AD over 500 years after the fact. Many like to put the date for the birth date at the time of the so-called Triple Conjunction a few years earlier, but who knows? Maybe I should look at Stellarium for what happened on 10 or 14 CE? In any case, it was not the alignment of Rev 12.
 

Seeker

Active Member
Irenaeus agrees with this proposition too, for he says that Jesus was born much later: … for our Lord was born about the forty-first year of the reign of Augustus. 112

Ellis, Ralph. King Jesus, prince of Judaea and Rome (The King Jesus Trilogy Book 2)
 
Last edited:
Top