We have been taught, all of our lives, that the past and the present are separate; that intentions changed hands, and different entities took power. Any trappings left behind is just homage, not intended to represent what it originally represented. Your statement is a perfect example of that training.
Where is the evidence to support that belief? All evidence comes from people with conflicts of interest. As you dig deeper, you find the exact same group of people doing the exact same thing in the exact same way. The "change of hands" is less different entities, and more like "one cousin killed another cousin and took control."
All of the different "emperors" and "kings" and "khans," etc. were all related. They all used the same form of government, and the real leaders were always the High Priests and the Money Changers (eventually called Bankers). These High Priests and Bankers were always the same families as well. When you dig in, you find that the only thing that really changed was the face of government. There was an ever improving illusion that power was being vested in the people. It never was. The real power remained the same, all throughout time, residing in an aristocracy, being ultimately controlled by the Churches/Temples/Mosques/etc. and the Banks.
The past and the present are directly connected. Nothing has changed at its core. The illusion of separation has been taught to us for generations, and we believe it, despite all the evidence to the contrary. No one knows about that evidence, because all of those institutions in charge taught us to live our entire lives happy to not look, and to repeat, as you have done, everything there is to know about the shadows on the cave wall; where they created the cave, the light, and the hand puppets that show us the story they want us to see.
Also, it doesn't require the Bible to see that the past and the present are intimately connected through the control structures, which was the point of my post.
Except that it does. That is exactly what it signifies. That it signified that before the Catholic church appropriated it is not contested. You suggest that it signified something different for the Catholic church. I am saying it does not. I am trying to tell you that the Catholic church was created by and is run by the exact same people as those who used the obelisk for its original purpose. The evidence for that assertion is everywhere. Your apology was created by those with conflicts of interest.
What does that prove or negate?
You stated:
You either believe the Bible is a historical record or you don't.
My statement was to indicate that that is irrelevant (in the sense that it is an unnecessary requirement) to being able to see these connections between past and present. On the contrary, while I agree it is an excellent resource, it can interfere with that process, because in order to hold on to the belief that the Bible is absolute truth, every word exact as given to us by Source, you must ignore a great deal of evidence.
We have been taught, all of our lives, that the past and the present are separate; that intentions changed hands, and different entities took power. Any trappings left behind is just homage, not intended to represent what it originally represented. Your statement is a perfect example of that training.
Where is the evidence to support that belief? All evidence comes from people with conflicts of interest. As you dig deeper, you find the exact same group of people doing the exact same thing in the exact same way. The "change of hands" is less different entities, and more like "one cousin killed another cousin and took control."
All of the different "emperors" and "kings" and "khans," etc. were all related. They all used the same form of government, and the real leaders were always the High Priests and the Money Changers (eventually called Bankers). These High Priests and Bankers were always the same families as well. When you dig in, you find that the only thing that really changed was the face of government. There was an ever improving illusion that power was being vested in the people. It never was. The real power remained the same, all throughout time, residing in an aristocracy, being ultimately controlled by the Churches/Temples/Mosques/etc. and the Banks.
The past and the present are directly connected. Nothing has changed at its core. The illusion of separation has been taught to us for generations, and we believe it, despite all the evidence to the contrary. No one knows about that evidence, because all of those institutions in charge taught us to live our entire lives happy to not look, and to repeat, as you have done, everything there is to know about the shadows on the cave wall; where they created the cave, the light, and the hand puppets that show us the story they want us to see.
Nope, nothing new under the sun as the Bible states.
The Bible says there is nothing new under the sun. You either believe the Bible is a historical record or you don't.
I'm pretty sure you didn't read what I wrote.
Also, it doesn't require the Bible to see that the past and the present are intimately connected through the control structures, which was the point of my post.
I read it a few times.
You opened with a false statement.
No, I have not been taught that the past and present are separate. I was taught there is nothing new under the sun.
And?
What does that prove or negate?
You made the claim:
Except that it does. That is exactly what it signifies. That it signified that before the Catholic church appropriated it is not contested. You suggest that it signified something different for the Catholic church. I am saying it does not. I am trying to tell you that the Catholic church was created by and is run by the exact same people as those who used the obelisk for its original purpose. The evidence for that assertion is everywhere. Your apology was created by those with conflicts of interest.
You stated:
My statement was to indicate that that is irrelevant (in the sense that it is an unnecessary requirement) to being able to see these connections between past and present. On the contrary, while I agree it is an excellent resource, it can interfere with that process, because in order to hold on to the belief that the Bible is absolute truth, every word exact as given to us by Source, you must ignore a great deal of evidence.