For centuries, historians have brought to life the stories of history as told by significant individuals of the time. Of course, what they fail to acknowledge is the fact that all stories are embellished and personal with each successive line.

Which could explain mythology in terms of The Bible – and the schism of belief. It could also account for the discord in accounts of various times in civilization. From eras of prosperity to eras of absolute poverty, the story differs. Depending on – the author and the author’s status in society.

Tribes sit and detail their history for the next generation, emboldening the hero, and enlarging the enemy, creating a picture that is truth – and fiction, which is then passed down and modified each generation thereafter until – it is written.

It would seem that wealth and status are paramount in the writing of history. That is – until now, and that predicament can be the legacy obsession of a political leader. As such, the re-writing of history is undertaken. It is thought that by mass absorption of media the false narrative will stick and the truth will fade. And while this is the case for many, there remains – the few.

There is one exception. The Bible was written and accounted from numerous sources that each stated and affirmed – the same core and placed that core in written form.

It is quite possible that the mythical gods that have been written about were actually the nephalim, the fallen angels who propagated earth and mated with the women – according to The Bible. The Minoans bear a striking resemblance to the offspring of Noah.  Much of history actually can be brought to the same alter.

There are interesting similarities in Buddhism and Christianity that may be the evolution of Timothy’s journey into Asia to spread the word of God. As though many of their core beliefs, outside of the ideology of God, are alike, even in their phraseology.

Buddhism, because it does not believe in a God, is actually not a religion per the strict definition, it is a philosophy of thought. Modern media altered that fact and created a ‘religion’ outside of the traditional and accepted definition. Of course today, one is allowed to be the religion of pasta, there are no boundaries whatsoever. They have attempted to make it, religion, a joke, the brunt of jokes, something laughable. But, in fact, it only makes us stronger in our prayer.

The Bolsheviks of WWI were atheists. Stalin was a Communist. Hitler a Marxist. Hillary a Marxist. With Communist leanings. Most Jewish people today call themselves ‘secular’ – as in no-religion. And defiantly deny it is ‘atheist’. But they are basically – one and the same. Still the ‘stats’ reveal that 15% of Israelites call themselves atheists, while 50% are ‘secular’. HELLO?   These are facts. You can ignore their content or try and process the true meaning. That is your prerogative.

According to Legal protectionism: Atheism is protected by the First Amendment as freedom of expression. However, secularism prevents freedom of expression, and can therefore be said to be contrary to the First Amendment.

That means – Israel, as a secular nation, is contrary to the First Amendment.

And we have a problem here Watson!

That would mean that nearly all of Israel and Hollywood would be in violation of the First Amendment by the fact that they practice secularism.

Oops.

Most Jewish people today are secular or non-practicing, which is the same as ‘secular’. It’s like saying, “I’m a secular Catholic.” There is no such thing! Or, “I’m a secular Mormon.” Hello? You can’t be both? That does not exist. It would be the equivalent of saying, “ I am a Jewish Sunni. There is no such thing!

And so, in the stories that are passed down today, what will be truth and what will be fiction? What will be wiped out by Google, and what will they, as the Dictator, decide will be recorded? Which history will be relayed? Will it include all the Wikileaks and Hillary scandals? Or will it be whitewashed, like history in previous decades, centuries, and thousands of years. Because if you think this is something new, you are more naive than a lamb.

We can not accept the dialogue of mainstream history – any more than we can accept their dialogue of the present!

So what do you think really happened in history, both ancient and present? An interesting thought…

And what will be written that defines – today.  I imagine it will not be the way I see it.