Efimok coin, Fomenko's phantom time and added 1,000 years of history

OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
3,723
Reactions
14,010
There is 1882 and 1862 tombstone in the OP. There is a “J” in there. It’s a wierd looking one, but it’s the same they use for “Juli” on the same stone.

A few additional of the same one. It’s Riga, Latvia I think.

EE06A498-07EF-4C28-A585-35961F1BF54D.jpeg2708CA90-F57E-441F-BB0D-C12B6BF8DD32.jpegCEDF078D-DACF-487B-A7FD-907A0E481D7D.jpegD90D28EC-2203-4198-B082-2A31E669C996.jpeg
 

Tabor7

New member
Messages
29
Reactions
51
Life Kreationz's video Staged History Part 1 focuses on this topic. Here is the link -


We do have accurate history till 70 AD thanks to Josephus. Josephus' Judean Wars Book Six written in Aramaic still survives which gives the chronological details. Here is the link where you can get Aramaic version of Josephus' Judean Wars - Josephus' Judean Wars Book Six From Ceriani Veteris Testamentum in Aramaic : Josephus : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Based on the information provided by Josephus, I wrote Timeline from Melchizedek till Fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD which is now available in the below link.

Timeline from Melchizedek to the destruction of the second temple of Jerusalem in 70 AD
 

Tabor7

New member
Messages
29
Reactions
51
We don't know how long ago is 70 AD. This is because we don't know how much time passed between 70 AD and our present date. The historical facts had been tampered after the time period of Josephus. Josephus also points out that Greeks back then had the attitude of neglecting historical facts.

But we do know that there was Bar Kokhba revolt (132 to 135 AD) against Roman Emperor Hadrian which resulted in the defeat of Bar Kokhba and his people.
 
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
3,723
Reactions
14,010
And the source you used. When were they discovered? I don’t mean their alleged creation date.
 

Tabor7

New member
Messages
29
Reactions
51
Are you talking about the sources of Josephus' Judean Wars Book Six?
 

Tabor7

New member
Messages
29
Reactions
51
All the details come from Josephus' Judean Wars Book Six in Aramaic (aka Syriac).

All the details on Josephus' Judean Wars Book Six in Syriac are available in this link.
Josephus' Judean Wars Book Six From Ceriani Veteris Testamentum in Aramaic : Josephus : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Its translation into Greek is also available although it is a poor translation.

I researched on this topic, because I know Aramaic (aka Syriac). I looked into Josephus' Judean Wars in Aramaic and I noticed its originality and how it clears all of the confusions found in the translated Greek version. Many of the information are also available under "Word Document" in the above link.
 

Tabor7

New member
Messages
29
Reactions
51
Yes, it is taken from "A Syriac translation of Book 6 in Translatio Syra Pescitto Vet. Test. ex cod. Ambrosiano sec. fere vi phololith. edita cura et adnotationibus Antonii Maria Ceriani, Milan, 1876-1883" which is listed in the link you posted.
 
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
3,723
Reactions
14,010
I’m more concerned with time frames at the moment. None of those were discovered prior to the 10th century, and are copies of the copies. Hence the questions:
  • How many copies were made prior to these ones?
  • If there was indeed a thousand years in between, how the texts survived?
  • and if there was no thousand years in between, why do we not have originals?
 

Tabor7

New member
Messages
29
Reactions
51
We do know that Josephus sent copies of Aramaic version of Judean Wars to Aramaic speakers which is mentioned in the preface of Judean Wars.

The only thing that survives today is Book Six in Aramaic. Even that under the disguised name "5 Maccabees." There were attempts in destroying Aramaic documents in favor of Greek translations during that time period.

That is what they did with New Testament. They tried to destroy Aramaic Originals in favor of Corrupt translated Greek NT.

It is quite easy to recognize the originality when you look into the content. I can give dozens of examples on that.
 
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
3,723
Reactions
14,010
We do not have a single original of anything to include Mr. Flavius. I see a big problem with that due to seeing strong reasons to believe those copies were altered.

I am not saying that copies are entirely bogus, but I do think they are altered to fit the contemporary scientific paradigms.

I do not believe for a second that structures like a 2,000 y.o. Pantheon with fully cemented dome, were constructed using horses and slaves, and with no construction computations and documentation. Yet none of the available copies of the so-called ancient sources provide anything making a remote sense of how those colossal structures were erected. These copies do not show how roman numersls were utilized for complex computations. In other words the primitive technology produced objects of the engineering levels totally not corresponding with the tech. And copies of the sources support this mismatch.

None of the copies of the sources talk about this planet being in turmoil or in major planet reshaping wars. We have continents changing shape, islands popping up and disappearing left and right. Nada of this magnitude in the copies of the sources.

These copies survived the cleansing our true history sustained and made it to our times. For me that means they are safe for the current world powers. So it just makes sense that everything official we have supports the notion, that for 10,000 years the mankind was dumb enough to not get off the horse prior to the 19th century.

Fortunately architectural and craftsmanship surviving evidence does not support blatant lies we are allowed to study.

I could go on and on with what these copies of the sources do not mention.

May be these copies could be used to a certain degree to estimate time frames, but I have my reasons to question their authenticity, and reliability.

That said, we can only work with whatever sources we have, good or bad.

So far, I’m just trying to figure out what year number those “ancients” used for 50 BC. No luck just yet.
 

Maria

Member
Messages
11
Reactions
73
How is Fomenko even able to read the old literature. History of the Russian language, Wikipedia Up to the 14th century, ancestors of the modern Russians spoke dialects of the Old East Slavic language. Reform of the alphabet, and achieved their goal of secularization and modernization. Blocks of specialized vocabulary were adopted from the languages of Western Europe. Most of the modern naval vocabulary, for example, is of Dutch origin. Latin, French, and German words entered Russian for the intellectual categories of the Age of Enlightenment. Greek words already in the language through Church Slavonic were refashioned to reflect post-Renaissance European rather than Byzantine pronunciation. By 1800, a significant portion of the gentry spoke French, less often German, on an everyday basis. The political upheavals of the early 20th century and the wholesale changes of political ideology gave written Russian its modern appearance after the spelling reform of 1918.
 
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
3,723
Reactions
14,010
They used mathematical approach. Not sure if they have ever used old text. In reality they did not need to. They analyzed what we learn in school today. They created a sort of a database with specific events corresponding to specific rulers, and discovered a lot of historical doubles, and a few triples.

Going to war 5 times in 10 years, winning twice and losing 3 times might not be something suspicious even if you have 5 rulers having the same bio in this regard.

But if you have 3 Kings separated by 150 years who were born at 7:32 am on Sunday afternoon. Their mother accidentally dropped them on the 23rd of May when they were 4 y.o. from the second story window into a stack of hay. And if on January 1st, when they were 17 y.o. they had a very strong case of diarrhea after losing their left pinkie due to frostbite during a frog hunt which took place in June of the year 1400, 1650 and 1800.... chances are, this is the same person.
 

Tabor7

New member
Messages
29
Reactions
51
But we do have the original copy of Josephus' Judean Wars Book Six. I know this, because I know Aramaic and extensively studied the material. It is accurate and clear while in Greek, it is filled with confusions since the translator's knowledge of Aramaic was very limited.

Aramaic also clears the confusions between Greek manuscripts and Latin manuscripts of Josephus' works.

Let me show how an original is identified through translations.

The “Mole” Example: Suppose two men in China are translating a book, and in their translations we find the following:

“Mary paid a lot of money to get rid of that annoying blemish on her skin”

“Mary paid a lot of money to get rid of that annoying furry, small burrowing animal.”

We can easily ascertain that the original language was English.

Let me give you an example from Aramaic version of Josephus.

Judean Wars 6:1:8 (Aramaic version - my translation) - "And were gathered in this battle, Aleksa and Zaphthaz who serving under the hand of Yokhanan and from under the hand of Simon [were] Malki and Bar-Metron and Yuda and Sosa and Bar-Yaqub and zealots, two brothers, Ersimon and Yuda."

Judean Wars 6:1:8 (Greek Version) - "Now those that most signalized themselves, and fought most zealously in this battle of the Judean side, were one Alexas and Gyphtheus, of John's party, and of Simon's party were Malachias, and Judas the son of Merto, and James the son of Sosas, the commander of the Idumeans; and of the zealots, two brethren, Simon and Judas, the sons of Jairus."

In Latin version of Judean Wars 6:1:8 (in Latin version, it is Book 7, Capt. IIII), it must be noted that the names of two zealot brothers are "Arsimon" and "Iudas" which is in agreement with Aramaic version above. In Judean Wars (Greek translation by H. ST. J. Thackeray), Simon and Judas are the called sons of "Ari" while Thackeray points out that Ari is called Jairus in Greek manuscript "Codex C" of Josephus' Judean wars.

Notes - Zaphthaz in Aramaic version is "Gyphtheus" in Greek version. In Aramaic, there are two people - Bar Metron and Yuda. But in Greek, this portion is mistranslated and became one person - "Judas the son of Merto." This confusion came because of Bar which means son. Bar Metron is a name while "Bar da Metron" can be translated as "the son of Metron..."

Metron is mistransliterated as Merto in Greek. In Aramaic, there are two people - Sosa and Bar-Yaqub. But in Greek, this portion is also mistranslated and became one person - "James the son of Sosas." Ersimon of Aramaic version becomes Simon in Greek Version. And in Greek, there is this addition - "the sons of Jairus." Since Jairus is also called "Ari" in Greek manuscripts as mentioned above, it is possible that the translator misread and mistranslated "Er"Simon and Yuda in Aramaic version as Simon and Judas, the sons of "Ari" in Greek version. It must be noted that Latin version is in agreement with Aramaic version as mentioned above.
 
Last edited:
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
3,723
Reactions
14,010
Where is that original copy at and is there a picture of it if any?

The text is semi-irrelevant without the original.
 
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
3,723
Reactions
14,010
Of course this is a copy. Most likely was discovered by someone like Poggio Bracciolini after 1418.

There is no original. If there is one please let me know where it is stored.
 

Tabor7

New member
Messages
29
Reactions
51
What I don't understand is why would you need the original when you get the copy of the original? The content is the same. Josephus himself made copies and sent to Aramaic speakers during his time.
 

Top