It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Ancient History Completely Made Up?

page: 3
14
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 05:41 PM
link   


It's actually quite amazing just how accurately it describes people places and things


Well if you believe in miracles, like 90 year old women having kids, virgin births, raising people from the dead and walking on water. Yes, quite believable.




posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 06:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: CB328
This is in response to another post on here currently about history being altered or fabricated. This article is fascinating, whether it's true or not, but I have no doubt at all that he is correct that much of the bible was fabricated or seriously altered in medieval times. I heard one biblical expert say that all the medieval manuscripts of the bible differ from each other by either mistake or design, so this may not be so far-fetched.

blackbag.gawker.com...

The link between history and the bible is what exactly ?



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 06:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Anaana
a reply to: tetra50

Stuck on repeat?

Yes, it does seem so…..
wish it wasn't that way.
tetra



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: CB328

All historical accounts of any event from any day and age are completely subjective and based on the account of individuals tasked with the undertaking of preserving cultural events. Many of these same accounts have then been translated by various cultures from generation to generation into different languages all using their own version of subjection.

No, all history is not completely made up. Some of it is true and some of it has had creative interjection added. Some of it is completely mis-interpreted, but how much is again left to subjective reasoning. The Bible is only one such example of this possibility and will not be the only such reference relegated to being subjected to alternate descriptions of events.

There was a time in the very recent past when something occurred that many witnessed and we still have no idea what really transpired, only many subjective accounts based on eye witness interpretations of the exact same event. 50% see it one way and 50% see it another.

The fact that many events in the past have been witnessed by different people at the the same time or ancient text were read by different cultures and translated subjectively by those same people is why we have the dilemma we are faced with today. Every religion thinks they are right, when in fact they are all based on different interpretations of the same event.



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 07:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Prezbo369

Considering the bible is 99% fabricated it's a great example tbh.....

Says who? Atheists?

How about that.


But what's not surprising is your outrage considering your views on science.

Who's outraged? I was simply commenting on the predictable subtext of the thread.

History is a landfill of lies and deception. You can start pretty much anywhere you'd like. Why pick the tired old Bible thing?

Wait. I know...



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 07:33 PM
link   
the european/monotheistic religious version of history is completely made up
after taking a close look at my AV
please see my siggy



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 07:44 PM
link   
I would say ancient history is fabricated and patched together with alot of guess work.



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 08:10 PM
link   
I agree with McNamara's words in a old documentary called Fog of War in which he quoted "History is written by the victors" (originally quoted by Winston S. Churchill) so I look history with a lot of suspicion. I suspect the original Jews and Egyptians were black (Greek Herodotus stated that Egyptians were black skinned with woolly hair etc) but our racist historians didn't want to accept that blacks were more advanced than the white race so stole their history.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 12:11 AM
link   
a reply to: borntowatch

The old testament seems to have been left in the bible to show how people got corrupted when they gained wealth and power. But some take it as we will be rewarded just for our belief in god, they neglect to see what happens when we get corrupted even though people in the old testament talk about people getting greedy.

People see what they want to see, they do not see the truth if it interferes with their desires.

I do not see anything bad in what Jesus tried to teach in the bible. Now if you were greedy, you would try to find that god can make you rich. God's intention in the bible seems to be to have people living in harmony together. A world without greed and desire to control others would be nice, but it won't be happening in this reality.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 12:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: CB328
This is in response to another post on here currently about history being altered or fabricated. This article is fascinating, whether it's true or not, but I have no doubt at all that he is correct that much of the bible was fabricated or seriously altered in medieval times. I heard one biblical expert say that all the medieval manuscripts of the bible differ from each other by either mistake or design, so this may not be so far-fetched.

blackbag.gawker.com...


medieval manuscripts ?

They found 2000 year-old manuscripts in 1946

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 10:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: NthOther

originally posted by: Prezbo369

Considering the bible is 99% fabricated it's a great example tbh.....

Says who? Atheists?

How about that.


But what's not surprising is your outrage considering your views on science.

Who's outraged? I was simply commenting on the predictable subtext of the thread.

History is a landfill of lies and deception. You can start pretty much anywhere you'd like. Why pick the tired old Bible thing?

Wait. I know...

_________________________________

Says who? THE POPE
_________________________________

A few years ago the Pope stood up and said "The Bible was NOT intended to be a history book. The story's are NOT true history but were intended to be examples of moral right and wrong." That may not be an exact word for word quote but it's pretty close. For me it seems clear, if the Bible is a true account of history there would not be so many versions.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 11:17 AM
link   
As far as historical fact or fiction look at it this way. If the Brits had won the war in 1776, how would we, today, look at people like Benedict Arnold and George Washington? Who would be the hero Plus just looking at Washington he DID NOT grow up on a cherry plantation, or chop down a cherry tree. George Washington was a map maker for the "British" army and married Martha for status. That is just one small part of what we call history. There's an old saying that goes "When the legend becomes popular teach the legend" We also know for a fact that kings, and leaders of nations, past and present, write their OWN history, and that is what is taught to following generations. Even someone who was standing right there at the time may agree with that version if it makes them look good. So what part can you trust to be true, I would say that around 2% of the good stuff is true, as is 98% of the bad.




top topics



 
14
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join