Larsguy47

More on Jacques-Louis David. He was a Freemason!

Albert Boime ("Les themes du Serment: David et la franc-maconnerie") unearthed proof that David, like Voltaire, Franklin and numerous Enlightenment figures, was a Freemason; this unexpected fact, coupled with iconographical and historical evidence, prompted him to offer a Masonic reading of the Tennis Court Oath and suggests, to me at least, that the Horatii and Brutus and the Lictors might be read in that light as well. James Rubin ("Jacques-Louis David et la main du peuple: saisir le site de la representation") drew upon the writings of Jurgen Habermas and Jacques Derrida, inter alia, to make the compelling case that, in the Revolutionary martyr portraits of Marat, Bara and Lepelletier, the "representation of history" involved "more than mere illustration of propaganda"; with the inscription "A MARAT/DAVID" emblazoned on the wooden box in the foreground of the Dying Marat, David has in effect turned the image, in Rubin's words, into "first-person discourse." And, in "David et le gender," the familiar trope of male-female polarity in the great Davidian history pictures was recast, by Bryson, as a bundle of fantasmes and fetishes (Bryson sees the Horatii, for instance, as fraught with symbolic castration and "homosocial" solidarity).

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...84/ai_18004714



This link with Jacques-Louis David to Freemasonry suggests that many of them know about the revisionism of the Persian Period and it must be their protected secret. The fact that Sir Isaac Newton troubled to write a detailed account of the Neo-Babylonian Period suggests the Priori of Sion and the Freemasons are likewise involved with supporting and maintaining the false chronology. Newton is an exellent quote, however, who clearly understood that the Jews were still in exile during the reign of Darius the Mede, a personage that he actually recognizes historically. Of late, Darius the Mede is not considered to have been a real person or is believed to have been Cyrus!

Here's an exerpt from his "A Short Chronicle" from the NB Period:


So thanks to 3DJay, this adds a cute little wrinkle to the chronology debate, that is, that it must be an important Mysteries/Freemason/Priori of Sion secret and thus they would suppress exposing or validating this chronology.

One source claims that the Pope was involved with validating Ptolemy's canon which introduced the revised chronology. But by the time the Pope came into power the chuch had long been taken over by the Freemasons and pagans.

Also, when the Book of Esther was revised so that she was not married to Artaxerxes, the "son of Xerxes" and was married to "Ahasuerus" which substituted for Xerxes, it was clear the revised chronology was being aggressively embranced by the Jews even as early as the 3rd Century CE when the Book of Esther was canonized finally. It had not yet become part of the canon when Josephus wrote his history and apparently he knew nothing of the Hebrew version of this book as his history is based on the LXX version where Esther is married to Artaxerxes instead of Xerxes. This suggests that Freemasons or the Priori of Sion had also began to infiltrate high levels of Judaism as well.

So this explains a lot. Apparently lots of people, or at least top-level Freemasons know about the original chronology and it's a secret or it is inferred only in cryptic art or cryptic writings. This sooo explains so much!


LG47

Toto

The mention of the Priori of Sion, a proven forgery, seals the fate of this thread.

There is some useful information here in some of the responses, but it is wandering too far from Biblical Criticism. The mods have decided to lock it.