Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 5 votes

Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood [Part 2]


  • Please log in to reply
5831 replies to this topic

#1471    Knul

Knul

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,045 posts
  • Joined:08 May 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Netherlands

Posted 17 October 2012 - 10:48 AM

View PostOtharus, on 15 October 2012 - 08:22 PM, said:

Lets refine the question.

You believe it is a 19th century hoax.

I believe it is a 13th century manuscript (or a copy of it).

If it is a (copy of a) 13th C. manuscript, that does not mean that all information in it has to be true, as in theory it could still all be fiction.

This already disqualifies several of your arguments, does it not?

So why - in your opinion - does it have to be a 19th C. hoax and can it not be a (copy of a) 13th C. manuscript?

Or can it?
If so, who adapted the language to 19th century standard Dutch ?


#1472    The Puzzler

The Puzzler

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,617 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Australia

  • I have no special talent. I am only passionately curious. ~ Einstein

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:37 AM

View PostKnul, on 17 October 2012 - 10:42 AM, said:

wralda means simply world and irtha earth.
I know that but the word Wr'alda is imo made up of two words, that is what world would actually really mean.

ancient protector or something like that.

Edited by The Puzzler, 17 October 2012 - 11:40 AM.

In an mmm bop it's gone...

#1473    Otharus

Otharus

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 2,400 posts
  • Joined:20 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:08 PM

View PostKnul, on 17 October 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

What testimonies under oath do you mean?

I will answer this later as I need to check my source.


#1474    Otharus

Otharus

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 2,400 posts
  • Joined:20 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:10 PM

View PostKnul, on 17 October 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

The learned books were from the Stadermann library.
CoL could not read them

What is your exaxt source for these two statements?


#1475    Otharus

Otharus

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 2,400 posts
  • Joined:20 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:16 PM

View PostKnul, on 17 October 2012 - 10:42 AM, said:

wralda means simply world and irtha earth.

WRALDA also means over-old-one (oer-oude), hence the dot that is usually placed between WR and ALDA.

JRTHA can also mean ore (erts).

So they don't "simply" mean world and earth, but are ambiguous, as many other OLB words.

View PostKnul, on 17 October 2012 - 10:48 AM, said:

If so, who adapted the language to 19th century standard Dutch?

I do not take this question seriously.


#1476    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:"Here the tide is ruled, by the wind, the moon and us."

  • God created the world, but the Dutch created the Netherlands

Posted 17 October 2012 - 01:05 PM

View PostOtharus, on 17 October 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

1) Volney: Please give at least one specific example of those 'almost literal quotes'.
It is unknown if he had Volney's book before or after OLB was translated and published.
Some things in OLB agree with Volney, others don't.
Volney is not fiction, it was based on research, similar to what we try to do.
If Cornelis was raised with ideas and trivia from the manuscript (his grandfather may still have been able to read it), Volney will indeed have appealed to him.

2) Books about scripts, language, mythology: From 1848 till 1867 he tried to figure out the manuscript by himself. Herds of people were and are interested in mythology.

3) Books about ship-building: He was a ship builder!

Look Otharus, I have shown you the quotes. That's why I don't bother much to take place in this discussion anymore.

And the books: what a nice coincidence he would find that piece of text in Volney's "The Ruins", you know, the part about "Jes-us", "Kris-en" and so on. It didn't 'jump out' of Volney's book if he had bought the book after the OLB was published to check the OLB's authenticity, so I doubt he owned the OLB before he owned Volney's "The Ruins".

For those who don't know: click on the link to my blog in my signature, and look for the entry called "The French Connection".

About the rest of your post: not only did he own books many other back then would have been  interested in, he had exactly the right books.

And yes, he was a shipbuilder, and YES, it shows in the OLB, lol !


#1477    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:"Here the tide is ruled, by the wind, the moon and us."

  • God created the world, but the Dutch created the Netherlands

Posted 17 October 2012 - 01:19 PM

View PostKnul, on 17 October 2012 - 10:48 AM, said:

If so, who adapted the language to 19th century standard Dutch ?

Yes, that's it.

If the OLB is a true ancient account using at least a 2600 years old Frisian dialect/language, then this is what happened:

-1- 2600 years ago the language looked very much like modern (19th century) Dutch
-2- It is said Willibrord could use his own Old English to communicate with the Frisians, because their languages were very similar. But his language would have been gobbledeegook for those using the OLB language
-3- Then, hundreds of years later (around 12th century) the language 'suddenly' resembles Dutch ... again.


#1478    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:"Here the tide is ruled, by the wind, the moon and us."

  • God created the world, but the Dutch created the Netherlands

Posted 17 October 2012 - 01:26 PM

View PostThe Puzzler, on 17 October 2012 - 02:29 AM, said:

How about some history then?

This is an interesting bit imo - it explains who the Gauls were, as missionary priests who led an expedition to Cadiz and up into Britain, where people who had become Kelts through Kalta taking residence there - then the Gauls (from Sidon/Phoenicia) take over the Kelts, because they had no lamps etc, lost their Fryan ways through the Kalta episode, the Kelts therefore were merged into a Gaulish people, who originally came in from Phoenicia, seemingly also called Thyriers (Tyrians) - the Gauls were probably just the priests. They, the Druids, really controlled the whole Keltic, now 'Gaulish' people, who promoted the behaviour even, losing their Fryan values. The Kelts of Britain, probably after Kalta's time, just weakened out to the Gauls too, Druid led mixed Celtic-Fryan population, inundated with women from Phoenicia, to breed into the population.

I wonder how true this is....

-------

Then came the Gauls out of the Mediterranean Sea with their ships to Cadiz, and along all our coasts, and fell upon Britain; but they could not make any good footing there, because the government was powerful and the exiles were still Frisians. But now came Kalta and said: You were born free, and for small offences have been sent away, not for your own improvement, but to get tin by your labour. If you wish to be free again, and take my advice, and live under my care, come away. I will provide you with arms, and will watch over you. The news flew through the land like lightning, and before the carrier’s wheel had made one revolution she was mistress of all the Thyriers in all our southern states as far as the Seine. She built herself a citadel on the high land to the north, and called it Kaltasburgh. It still exists under the name of Kêrenak. From this castle she ruled as a true mother, against their will, not for her followers, but over them, who were thenceforth called Kelts. The Gauls gradually obtained dominion over the whole of Britain, partly because they no longer had any citadel; secondly, because they had there no Burgtmaagden; and thirdly, because they had no real lamps. From all these causes the people could not learn anything. They were stupid and foolish, and having allowed the Gauls to rob them of their arms, they were led about like a bull with a ring in his nose.



The Golen, as the missionary priests of Sidon were called, had observed that the land there was thinly peopled, and was far from the mother. In order to make a favourable impression, they had themselves called in our language followers of the truth; but they had better have been called abstainers from the truth, or, in short, “Triuwenden,” as our seafaring people afterwards called them. When they were well established, their merchants exchanged their beautiful copper weapons and all sorts of jewels for our iron weapons and hides of wild beasts, which were abundant in our southern countries; but the Golen celebrated all sorts of vile and monstrous festivals, which the inhabitants of the coast promoted with their wanton women and sweet poisonous wine.

I have mentioned the GOLA.

You remember the Jewish GOLA? The Jewish refugees who had lived alongside the Phoenicians in Sidon and had adapted to the Phoenician creed?

Also about Charles De Grave, who mentioned the KALTA in his book, a book read by Over de Linden? He said they were the European Chaldeans (again: check "The French Connection" post in my OLB blog).

For those new to this thread: the OLB doesn't use the word "Gauls", it uses GOLAR or maybe even GOLEN.


#1479    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:"Here the tide is ruled, by the wind, the moon and us."

  • God created the world, but the Dutch created the Netherlands

Posted 17 October 2012 - 03:06 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 17 October 2012 - 01:26 PM, said:

I have mentioned the GOLA.

You remember the Jewish GOLA? The Jewish refugees who had lived alongside the Phoenicians in Sidon and had adapted to the Phoenician creed?

Also about Charles De Grave, who mentioned the KALTA in his book, a book read by Over de Linden? He said they were the European Chaldeans (again: check "The French Connection" post in my OLB blog).

For those new to this thread: the OLB doesn't use the word "Gauls", it uses GOLAR or maybe even GOLEN.

http://www.zionism-i...om/dic/Gola.htm


#1480    The Puzzler

The Puzzler

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,617 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Australia

  • I have no special talent. I am only passionately curious. ~ Einstein

Posted 17 October 2012 - 03:17 PM

View PostKnul, on 17 October 2012 - 10:48 AM, said:

If so, who adapted the language to 19th century standard Dutch ?
Just for interest, not necessarily for you, is this comparison of sentences...

-------------------------------------------

Dutch, like other Germanic languages, is conventionally divided into three development phases which were:
  • 450(500)–1150 Old Dutch (First attested in the Salic Law)
  • 1150–1500 Middle Dutch (Also called "Diets" in popular use, though not by linguists)
  • 1500–present Modern Dutch (Saw the creation of the Dutch standard language and includes contemporary Dutch)
The transition between these languages was very gradual and one of the few moments linguists can detect somewhat of a revolution is when the Dutch standard language emerged and quickly established itself. Standard Dutch is very similar to most Dutch dialects.
The development of the Dutch language is illustrated by the following sentence in Old, Middle and Modern Dutch:

"Irlôsin sol an frithe sêla mîna fan thên thia ginâcont mi, wanda under managon he was mit mi" (Old Dutch)
"Erlossen sal [hi] in vrede siele mine van dien die genaken mi, want onder menegen hi was met mi" (Middle Dutch)

(Using same word order)
"Verlossen zal hij in vrede ziel mijn van degenen die [te] na komen mij, want onder menigeen hij was met mij" (Modern Dutch)
"Hi sal mijn ziele in vrede verlossen van die gene die mi ghenaken, want si waren onder veel teghen mi." (Vorstermansbijbel, 1528/1531)

(Using correct contemporary Dutch word order)
"Hij zal mijn ziel in vrede verlossen van degenen die mij te na komen, want onder menigeen was hij met mij" (Modern Dutch) (see Psalm 55:19)
"He shall my soul in peace free from those who me too near come, because amongst many was he with me" (English literal translation in the same word order)
"He will deliver my soul in peace from those who attack me, because, amongst many, he was with me" (English translation in unmarked word order) (see Psalm 55:18)
http://en.wikipedia..../Dutch_language

In an mmm bop it's gone...

#1481    The Puzzler

The Puzzler

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,617 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Australia

  • I have no special talent. I am only passionately curious. ~ Einstein

Posted 17 October 2012 - 03:27 PM

View PostAbramelin, on 17 October 2012 - 03:06 PM, said:

Interesting article, hmm.
I'll sleep on it lol, good night.

In an mmm bop it's gone...

#1482    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:"Here the tide is ruled, by the wind, the moon and us."

  • God created the world, but the Dutch created the Netherlands

Posted 17 October 2012 - 03:49 PM

View PostThe Puzzler, on 17 October 2012 - 03:27 PM, said:

Interesting article, hmm.
I'll sleep on it lol, good night.

Nah, lol, read what I wrote about the Hebrews living in Sidon, about these Hebrews adopting the Phoenician religion, and then about them together with Phoenicians ending up in ancient Marseilles, or Massilia,

These Hebrews were kind of UNwanted in ancient Israel because they were heretics, and so they hooked up with the Phoenicians and joined them on their travels.

They were heritics, unwanted, kicked out from Israel, and therefore they were refugees... GOLA.


+++

EDIT:

There have been times I thought some Jewish heretic was part of the team that created the OLB. The Jews are/were people who knew/know their scriptures by heart.

But then... Jews were not much 'loved' in the 19th century, so to me that option is a long shot.

.

Edited by Abramelin, 17 October 2012 - 04:04 PM.


#1483    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:"Here the tide is ruled, by the wind, the moon and us."

  • God created the world, but the Dutch created the Netherlands

Posted 17 October 2012 - 03:57 PM

View PostThe Puzzler, on 17 October 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:

Just for interest, not necessarily for you, is this comparison of sentences...

-------------------------------------------

Dutch, like other Germanic languages, is conventionally divided into three development phases which were:

< skip >



You should have added an example of King Alfred's language, or Willibrord's language.

It is said they could converse with the Frisians without any problems.

And from what I learned, the language they used didn't resemble the OLB language.

.

Edited by Abramelin, 17 October 2012 - 04:09 PM.


#1484    NO-ID-EA

NO-ID-EA

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 343 posts
  • Joined:14 Oct 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:wherever im at

Posted 17 October 2012 - 05:02 PM

Hi Puzzler the Celtic words Higgins used for lofty were both Alp and Alb, saying that the p and b  , were often interchanged................Abe...just because you have the word ARD for high , does not mean Alp or alb are not also used for meaning at height , how many words do you have  ? English has many .

Otharus...interesting you mention wr'alda also having the meaning oer oude , did you also know higgins thinks the saxons, angles, and jutes were all Hebrews (ioude= jouden, that were all banished from Frisia , and sent to the penal isle of Britain, some of the easiest word play would be Judes-jutes , Angles - angels, and Fresians - free sions , and that the Saxons were originally the S'occa ,sacca, saccae , sacsae , to saxae , and then saxons over a period of time......in Italy the name went from S'occa to socci , soci ,to osci to tosci ,Tusci to Truscan and eventually Etruscan.

Check it out the G'ouda Brahman are the oldest known sect of  Brahman in India , and it is thought by some at a very early date they were expelled from india, and went to settle around the Caspian sea area , and they kept their name i'ouda , which became j'ou , and j'oudah, from here they became a large tribe that expelled hosts of their people when they became too many for the land to support,

Abraham was a Brahman , Higgins says in Anacalypsa  that sara , was called saras-v'ati( from this name he has more to say about the tribe of H'ati)  They were living in a place called UR of the Chaldees, and were also called Chaldees...........Long story short......

Eventually they came to Gaul, Britain , Ireland , Frisia , from here the name Chaldee changed to Khaltee and eventually Kelt or Celt , and the sacca or sacred portion became known as the Culdee , who were a well known sect of solitary monastics , related closely to the Druids ( who are probably just Dru=True, Ids=Spirited)

In Ireland the Culdee ,Chaldee , Khalte became the Ciel-dei.. (sky-Gods, and from this probably Scy-thios or Scythians) or Celi-de, and in Scotland the Kelidei............the word Khaldt means woods , or one who dwells in the woods,and in other parts was called dwnkelt or dunkeld .....Whittaker in his book says all Gaelt , gael, kaelt , gault, gaul ,kelt, celt all come from the word for woods, and mean woodsman, wood lander or dweller in the woods,

The last Culdee (Druid) Temple called a Cel,Cil,  or Kil,Kell was in Bramham( nearly Brahman again) was in Yorkshire , and was called Beth-Rimmon in AD 936.


Not saying i believe all this guys but it is interesting,
Have you guys and gals found many connections to Fresians and Jews and or Hebrews in your searching   ???

Edited by NO-ID-EA, 17 October 2012 - 05:13 PM.


#1485    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:"Here the tide is ruled, by the wind, the moon and us."

  • God created the world, but the Dutch created the Netherlands

Posted 17 October 2012 - 05:03 PM

View PostThe Puzzler, on 17 October 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:

Just for interest, not necessarily for you, is this comparison of sentences...

-------------------------------------------

Dutch, like other Germanic languages, is conventionally divided into three development phases which were:


Now look at what you linked to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salic_Law

http://en.wikipedia....nguage_

"maltho thi afri lito"

Does that resemble the Old Frisian language? It doesn't, like it doesn't resemble Old Dutch. It's much older.

Old (very old) Dutch and Old Frisian and Old English were languages that resembled eachother a lot. They were nothing but dialects of one language, showing up in two different places, like in the Dutch cities of Amsterdam and Haarlem.

Saying: it evolved from something that doesn't resemble Old Dutch or Old Frisian into something that does.


.

Edited by Abramelin, 17 October 2012 - 05:14 PM.





34 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 34 guests, 0 anonymous users