Although your approach will turn people off, I will say this:
What we call christianity is all that is left of information we SHOULD know, and all that needs a "tweak" are the "cast of characters."
Christianity boils down to:
1) A coming event (called the day of the lord)
2) An arrival from the sky regarding "help" BEFORE the event hits (the text calls Jesus and angels)
3) a "global" evacuation ... (not simply the Jews)
4) the event arrival
This picture has a history of building in the minds of the people back then, and the best information attained covers the the 2 centuries or so before Paul blew the whistle.
Daniel was written at a time where it seems there was a great increase in
aurora due to a very active sun and the 11-year cycle. The third century
BC begins the best record of ‘things seen in the sky,’ and a work done by
Dr Andrew Solow of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution shows
this. Descriptions were written such as: “the sky lit up during the night,”
“the sky appeared to be on fire,” “a phantom navy was seen shining in the
Table 1: Record of years celestial events mentioned in classical literature,
223 217 214 209 206 204 200 198 197 183 181 172 169
166 163 162 147 134 130 128 125 124 118 117 114 113
111 108 106 104 102 95 94 93 92 91
A.R. Solow / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 232 (2005) 67–70. On celestial events, auroral activity, and the solar cycle in classical antiquity. The complete record covers the 800-yr period from 467 BCE to 333 AD.
However, the record for the 133-yr period from 223 BCE to 91 BCE is the most reliable and uniform.
Since we have no ORIGINAL biblical manuscripts, it's impossible to say who changed what document and when. But the bottom line is - they are here, and the overall picture has been corrupted by what's going on. TPTB know it's coming, and have known since the '50s.
"For it is by fire and in fire that our hemisphere will soon be tried. And just as, by means of fire, gold is separated from impure metals, so, Scripture says, the good will be separated from the wicked on the great Day of Judgment."
Their approach explanation was based in an esoteric biblical approach in the '50s, and this changed by the '60s, and the last message to the public was the Georgia Guidestones.
"It is the Gospel according to Science, the last of all but for us the
first, because it teaches us that, save for a small number of the elite, we
must all perish."
"...and we learn that a country exists, where death cannot reach man at the terrible time of the double cataclysm.
As for the geographical location of this promised land, from which the
Elite will take part in the return of the golden age, it is up to us to find
it. For the Elite, the children of Elias, will be saved according to the
word of Scripture, because their profound faith, their untiring
perseverance in effort, will have earned for them the right to be
promoted to the rank of disciples of the Christ-Light. They will bear
his sign and will receive from him the mission renewing for
regenerated humanity the chain of tradition of humanity which has
The above was from the "added chapter" to Fulcanelli's 1920's work that was oddly republished in the 50s.
According to Vincent Bridges:
This second edition included a new chapter entitled “The Cyclic Cross of
Hendaye” and a few changes in its illustrations. No mention of these
changes appeared in Canseliet’s preface to the second edition.
With Canseliet’s use of everything else by Fulcanelli, how are we to
account for the complete absence of reference to Hendaye in Canseliet’s
works prior to the mid 1950s? If the chapter is the work of Champagne,
then Canseliet must have known about it. This is not a trivial question.
The Hendaye chapter is perhaps the single most astounding esoteric work
in Western history. It offers proof that alchemy is somehow connected to
eschatology, or the timing of the end of the world. And it offers the
conclusion that a “double catastrophe” is imminent. If Canseliet had
known of this, he would surely have used it, or at least mentioned it. Yet,
the silence is complete and compelling.
So, take it or leave it ... welcome to constructivism.