Sunday, July 23, 2017

Richard Nielsen's Grail Code is Alive and Well

A quiet Sunday morning in July was interrupted by an email inquiry from a friend who asked me about an article written by my co-author of "The Kensington Rune Stone: Compelling New Evidence", Richard Nielsen.  This article entitled, "There is No Grail Code on the Kensington Rune Stone", appeared in the Epigraphic Society of Occasional Papers, Volume 27 (2009).  Pat asked me, "Why did Nielsen change his opinion about a discovery that he actually made?"  Pat continued, "After reading the ESOP article is looked like he (Nielsen) was more interested in trying to discredit you than prove anything about a Grail Code."

It has been over a year now since Dick passed away and Pat's questions prompted me to recall my days working with Nielsen and our joint discovery of what Dick and I decided to call, "The Grail Code."  Followers of our work might recall in 2002 I generated a microscopic photo-library of the entire inscription of the Kensington Stone that led to my documenting numerous previously unnoticed punch marks and short strokes made by the carver after the inscription was carved.  Dick and my analysis of these anomalies led to several discoveries including the so-called "Grail Code" first noticed by Nielsen who mentioned it to me.

Dick was quite proud of this discovery and made sure we included it in the introduction of our 2006 book.  You can imagine my surprise when his 2009 paper was published where he unconvincingly tried to make the Grail Code marks disappear using a low resolution 3D images generated during a study performed on the KRS in 2008.  Dick had grown impatient with me for reasons I still do not understand and appeared driven to undermine everything he and I had discovered together.  Regardless, this article, and others he wrote based on this 3D study, did nothing to undermine anything but his own credibility and positive legacy of the good work he did during his over 30 years researching the artifact.  

Nielsen asserts in the article that there was "staining" caused by a silicon rubber material used during the making of four casts of the artifact.  These claims are false and have nothing to do with the physical modifications made by the carver.  Nielsen claims there are man made dots present where there are none while at the same time claiming man made dots do not exist when clearly they do.  The evidence he put forth was in the form of photographs of such low resolution it was beneath him to have offered them.  Let's start with the first letter in the Grail Code.


This extremely low resolution image was offered as evidence that no single dot exists in the upper left arm of the ''g" rune on line one of the KRS inscription.  I don't believe Nielsen really thought an image of this poor quality would pass as legitimate evidence.


Here again Nielsen offers a very low resolution image trying to argue away a clear and distinct punch mark on the end of the lower right leg of the "r" rune.


Not only are the man made punch marks clear and obvious within the yellow circles in the images I generated in 2002, but the high resolution 3D microscopic images of the punch marks I took in 2011 clearly show their existence.


Nielsen then offers over century-old photographs known to have been retouched as evidence to try and prove no man made marks exist when they obviously do.



Here again, microscopic photographs taken in 2002, and high resolution 3D microscopic images taken in 2011, clearly show the existence of man made marks added to the character by the medieval carver.

The question is no longer if these modifications to the runes exist, the question now is did the carver intentionally try to encode the word "GRAL/Grail" within the inscription.  We cannot know with any certainty, but based on the related evidence I have presented in my three books that is consistent with the Kensington inscription having been carved by a Cistercian monk in the 14th Century it's very likely he did.  One thing I can assure the readers of this blog, in 2004 Richard Nielsen believed this to be true because he was the one who first offered the idea to me and insisted it be included in our 2006 book.  I want to be sure Dick gets credit for this discovery even though he tried unsuccessfully to back-peddle on it.

Jerry Lutgen generated this image of the Narragansett Rune Stone inscription using Reflective Transformation Imaging (RTI).  The 2-3/8” tall by 2” wide area to the left of the “s” rune on line one appears to have been hammered on or chipped out indiscriminately. (Photograph courtesy of the Jerry Lutgen, 2014)   



38 comments:

  1. I did ask those questions - and I have asked even more over the last two years. There is just this huge dichotomy between the work that Richard Nielsen produced in 2006 and prior when compared to what he produced subsequently. For example, he spends two decades researching the Spirit Pond Rune Stones, then he turns around in 2009 and torches them in an ESOP article that is so fraught with contradictions, inconsistencies, and errors that I could only wonder what had happened. I never met him, but it is clear to see that he was brilliant and tenacious, qualities that would have made him an impressive engineer (which he was, btw). Then I read his post-2006 work where he walks away from the various punch holes, ascribing them to be pattern marks, and my first question becomes "Where is the diagram illustration of the pattern marks that he drew?" I can't find it, so I am left wondering if he ever made one. I work with engineers, brilliant like Nielsen, and when they deduce something you can watch them work an equation, draw a diagram, or sketch notes. It is second nature for them. I have to presume Nielsen was the same - so where is the pattern illustration? And why did he use thick-lined red circles that occluded the very area he was speaking to when a thin-lined arrow that was slightly offset from the area would have worked better? For me, there are these dichotomies with his post-2006 work that I have a difficult time reconciling. He was a brilliant man who seemed to walk off into the wilderness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pat,

      I never had an opportunity to get a sense of his competence as an engineer because he was solely focused on the KRS during our interactions. However, we spent five years working very closely together on all aspects of the Kensington inscription and I witnessed firsthand that tenacity and thoroughness you mentioned. He believed in all his heart the KRS was medieval and fully supported everything we published in 2006.

      Some might say he became senile in his old age, but that was not the case. However, he did receive undue influence he didn't handle very well. Regardless, he knew exactly what he was doing.

      What is important to remember is Dick Nielsen was the first to consider the medieval Cistercians and Knight Templar being connected to the inscription and he was right. Even though he later tried to disassociate himself with that line of research, Dick was the one who started me down that path. I believe he was concerned it would negatively impact the acceptance he craved of the Scandinavian scholars.

      It's a shame he didn't live long enough to see what's coming and would have no choice but to accept the facts, but deep down he'd be satisfied knowing he was right all along.

      Delete
  2. Here is Professor Henrik Williams' take on this matter:

    "Richard Nielsen’s method is one of coming up with a lot of suggestions, but in my experience he will in the
    end always prefer facts and truths to fancies. (His grail idea is one example.) Wolter on the other hand does not
    readily see the merits of checking a good story and uncritically elaborates all of Nielsen’s suggestions, even
    when they have been abandoned by him. But according to Wolter (p. 162) the reason he and Nielsen are no
    longer cooperating is that the latter “had to distance himself from the ‘Templar’ research” in order to “continue
    pursue working with the world’s top runologists”. That would make Nielsen a hypocrite, not a very nice insinuation.

    The true reason is, of course, that he was too honest and had too much integrity to follow Wolter on his quest for
    the Holy Grail, but either Wolter does not understand this or he does not want to admit it. Nielsen has since
    disassociated himself from many of Wolter’s claims."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous,

      I’m not sure why Henrik’s Williams bias opinion matters in this regard. However, he correctly pointed out one of the reasons why Nielsen chose to part ways with me. I don’t think that makes Nielsen a hypocrite; he understood he had to abandon the Templar angle if he wanted to work with scholars like Williams. It’s as simple as that.

      In any case, the Templar origin of the Kensington Rune Stone has proven to be correct and that Nielsen was right all along. I don’t expect Williams to accept these facts, but he is welcome to his opinion. Flawed as it may be.

      Delete
  3. After reading this article here, it reminded me of the Narragansett Rune Stone with its multiple, in my opinion, "dots" in and around the letters and inscription. To the best of my ability, I remember seeing/observing at least 8 dots, including the obvious 2 around the inscription. Most of the others were within, on or at the end of some of the letters in this inscription. I have detailed pics from a visit to the NRS, when it was still in the ocean, where the water highlighted these apparent dots, which appeared to be deliberately made/carved into these letters!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Steve,

      I have reached out to Jerry Lutgen who performed RTI imaging a couple of years ago on the NRS inscription with the intent of, among other things, to try to determine if man made punch marks were made within the carved lines.

      Hopefully, he will chime in here. In the meantime I'll load up one of his high quality images.

      Delete
  4. One of several purposes for stoneholes, I believe, was to conceal things buried. And whenever anything was buried by the playful Norsemen, there would be a way of re-finding whatever was buried.

    This topic is bringing me back to my earliest days of trying to understand the KRS, and stoneholes in particular. Speaking of the GRAL has reminded me that it seems very possible that a "sacred geometric" design was put into play at Runestone Hill, using stoneholes in rocks...as you yourself was getting at with those three white lines projecting out across Runestone Hill from a sky view in your Hooked-X book, Scott.

    It seems strange now, several years later, to come back around to this very topic...full circle. If you recall, I had extrapolated out a jewel-shaped sacred geometric design, which had a large X in it, and this was "superimposed" on the ground, as though viewed from the sky. What was astonishing to me at the time was that I saw that the KRS was actually found on Runestone Hill precisely where a hook might be found in its proper place on the upper right stem of a typical Hooked-X, but in this case laid out upon the very ground. It appeared to me several years ago that the KRS party left the runestone with it actually put in place to symbolize a hook on the X laid out upon the ground.

    So, it seems that they either knew of the pre-existence of the stoneholes and the purposeful sacred geometric design, and then added the KRS...or, they made the stoneholes at the same occasion as carving the KRS. I personally think the former, as I think there would have been some reason for them thinking Scandinavians would be returning to that spot.

    That reason may also have had something to do with the GRAL you brought up, Scott, if in fact that code does exist on the KRS. In other words, perhaps something relating to the GRAL was purposely buried within the sacred geometric design--like at the center of the X, for instance. (That spot would be close to the bottom of Skrael Hill--I won't indicate where.) There are no fewer than three stoneholes within paces of one another on top of Skrael Hill, which is more marked-up with stoneholes than Runestone Hill originally was, as you know.

    Soon after the new Park Superintendent, Mr. Bonk, arrived, I let him know about this possibility of something being buried at Runestone Park, in association with a grid design spelled out by stoneholes. Anyway, Scott, if you were right about stoneholes and sacred geometry possibly going together at Runestone Park, maybe it involved: (A) the GRAL, and (B) the purpose of "re-acquisition."

    I feel strongly about one thing: Norsemen left a Code-Stone indicating something buried just one river over west from the Chippewa River; so it wouldn't surprise me if they left something buried at Runestone Hill, too.

    Anyway, we can see that stoneholes, encoding and burying something can readily go hand-in-hand with medieval Scandinavians. I see this clearly near Appleton, and as a possibility at Runestone Park. But, if something is buried at Runestone Park, it may, indeed, have something to do with Knights Templar treasure, and maybe part of it in the form of something related to the GRAL. Why not? Everything is so seemingly far-out and fanciful, anyway. People are in for a big shock one day...it's only a matter of time....

    - Gunn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gunn,

      There certainly could be something buried by the Templars in the land west of Kensington; in fact we know there is. One thing that is no longer in question is the KRS was definitely carved and shallowly buried as a land claim (settlement is the term they used). This was the primary purpose of the KRS party and they were no plans to return to the east coast settlements or Europe. They assimilated with the indigenous people and fortunately, they did just fine for at least the first 34 years.

      Indeed, more info is just a matter of time and it will definitely be worth the wait!

      Delete
  5. Scott, I'm operating under a different scenario, as you know. Though we agree on the main point of the KRS being authentic, we then fork-off in different directions...which is okay for the purposes of speculation. I believe it's good to kick things around for possible insight from different angles.

    You must have information you're not sharing yet, since I don't see any basis for thinking the KRS party purposely planned to assimilate with the indigenous people. If they planned to acquire or reaquire something, as a fairly new (2010) interpretation of the KRS's message indicates, wouldn't they want to take something back with them? What could they acquire or reaquire that they would then want to assimilate into American Indians with?

    I personally think they were intending to reaquire the fur trade, or missionary work, or perhaps even something buried--a land-claim...or maybe a combination of these things. But, what good would a land-claim be if a place and culture representing the land-claim is basically abandoned?

    On the other hand, it looks to me like Runestone Hill may have already existed when the KRS was put there. By this, I mean I think the stoneholes already existed there from an earlier time. This would go along with the notion of reaquiring something, perhaps in this case connected with Runestone Hill.

    But again, I take the message literally while you don't. I take the KRS as being an actual memorial runestone, placed at Runestone Hill because they figured Scandinavians would be coming back to read about their sad misadventure. I think Runestone Hill was already a known defensive-style, moat-like camping place a few miles off the Chippewa River, accessible back then only by the ridgeline coming in from the west--right across the three stonehole rocks on Skrael Hill.

    Holand concentrated as though there was only one or two expeditions (Greenlanders and the Knutson search party), but I think there's good enough reason to speculate that there were many excursions into this region...over the hundreds of years before the French arrived. I look at the KRS party as probably being late-comers, more interested perhaps in looking for evidences of past land-claims than in planting their own.

    Well, there is something else we agree on: that Templars or post-Templars (perhaps both at different times) involved themselves in this region. I think that maybe Templars were involved with planting an earlier land-claim (or claims) and that post-Templars/Cistercians in the form of the KRS party were looking to aquire proof of it. Maybe they intended to look in more than one place for this proof.

    So, it ends up looking to me like maybe the KRS party were interested in re-invigorating past land-claims...perhaps even from back during the period of the Crusades, when the Catholic Church and Templars were (seemingly) united at the hip. So, in this case involving the KRS, maybe post-Templars were trying to beat representatives of the Catholic Church--the later French--to any land-claims (and/or treasure) previously buried. (Mere speculations. Thanks.)

    - Gunn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gunn,

      Yes, we have new information we have not yet released to the public regarding the KRS party and much more. No, the Templars who cam were not missionaries in any way; like their Native American brethren they venerated a feminine Deity first and foremost; there is absolutely no question about that. You can put to rest the notion of the Roman Catholic Church being involved in their mission out of your head. The RCC were the ideological mortal enemies of the Templars and Native Americans.

      Based on the new documents, there is no evidence suggesting the Templars visited the central part of the continent prior to the KRS party.

      You are welcome to believe what you want, but faith isn't going to trump (pardon the inadvertent metaphor...) the facts in this situation.

      Delete
    2. "No, the Templars who cam were not missionaries in any way; like their Native American brethren they venerated a feminine Deity first and foremost; there is absolutely no question about that."

      But wouldn't the American Indians coming from Northeast Asia have brought their worship of a male sky deity with them?

      Regards,

      Andre Kovac

      Delete
    3. Andre,

      Who said the Algonquin tribes came from Northeast Asia? The document make it clear the native tribes who the KRS party assimilated with venerated a feminine Deity.

      Delete
    4. Scott,

      I'm learning a lot here, but now I'm confused. Where did the Algonquin come from?

      Regards,

      Andre Kovac

      Delete
    5. Andre,

      There is a lot of new evidence that certain groups of Native Americans have ancient ancestors came to North America across the Atlantic from Europe along continental ice shelves following seal herds as far back as 20-25,000 years ago.

      The old theory of natives evolving from people that migrated exclusively across the Bering Straight land bridge is an over-simplified version of what was most likely a much more complicated reality.

      Delete
    6. Scott,

      Why did they follow seal herds? Were there no animals in Europe? Do seals even travel in herds?

      Regards,

      Andre Kovac

      Delete
    7. Andre,

      Yes, seals do travel in herds and this thesis was put forward by Dennis Stanford at the Smithsonian Institution. The evidence put forth in his 2013 book, "Across Atlantic Ice" was convincing to many scholars and me.

      Delete
    8. My take-away is that probable European spear-point technology spread quickly from America's east coast westward, but not the initiators of the technology--which involved being able to quickly fix spear-points onto a single shaft. (This way, a spear-point or multiple spear-points could be left in a large animal without the need to try and pull an embedded spear-point out.)

      It looks to me like there simply weren't enough of the people who introduced the technology to leave a DNA trail. In other words, the technology "took" quickly and spread, but not the DNA of those bringing it.

      But, obviously, because of the climatic differences, most peoples would have migrated from America's prehistoric west coast eastwardly rather than the other way around.

      Of course, I'm always open to other interpretations of the available evidences.

      - Gunn

      Delete
  6. The notion of a GRAL code was just too much for some of your early supporters, Scott, as you know. For this reason, some felt the need to back-peddle in your support. I find it very interesting that Nielsen first supported the idea of a code and then obfuscated with his own findings about it. I think you're right, Scott, that the idea had become an embarrassment of sorts to him, because others considered the idea as preposterous.

    I don't consider the idea to be too out-landish; if the markings indicating GRAL are legit, then it pretty much has to be a hint of some kind. About what, though? What good would it do to hint about something relating to the GRAL, unless there is a future purpose to it. The hint must be acted upon, if the GRAL code is genuine. "This tension must be paid!"

    There are only two ways to act upon the GRAL code, if real, and that is either to ignore it or to dig for it. But where? Well, where indicated, perhaps, as with the proposed Norse Code-stone I found close to the SD border with MN. A code is no good unless it can later be decoded (understood) and acted upon.

    After I send this off, I'm going to email you an image, Scott, a drawing. I hope you will post it here somewhere at the heading of this subject, because it supports the idea of a GRAL code, and it further supports an idea you first had: I believe you were correct to initially consider the stoneholes present around Runestone Hill as possibly being related to a "sacred geometric grid," or shape.

    What better shape to indicate a special design to conceal something valuable than an easily-recognizable cut-jewel shape? It may be that earlier explorers buried something within the cut-jewel shape, containing a large X...and then the KRS post-Templars, if so, may have decided to leave the GRAL in place (instead of "reacquiring" it) until a more opportune time, since they had just lost half of their men. In this scenerio, the KRS was left on the ground as a hook on a large X, to help identy and confirm who left the memorial. (I believe the KRS is a true memorial, never buried and not a land-claim, as you know.)

    Anyway, in my mind, the existance of a possible GRAL code goes along with the idea of a possible stonehole "grid" design at Runestone Park, especially since I see this very thing as occurring near where the Pomme de Terre River discharges into the MN River, not far west from where the Chippewa River (associated with the KRS) discharges. My point is that the same People of Old may be responsible for both stonehole encodings and burials....

    -Gunn

    ReplyDelete
  7. Has anyone considered the KRS to be the "holy grail" and Olaf found it??? Possibly the punch marks spell out exactly what the stone is intended to represent.

    Geeked to pieces with anticipation,

    Anthony Warren

    ReplyDelete
  8. There is so much new information concerning all this, its hard to keep up! Scott, will the new book cover all this info, like the Knutson party?? Is there a release date yet??
    Another possible tie in concerns Father Marquette. Is there any info as to Church seemingly tracking the party that placed the Kensington Rune stone? There is some strange info concerning my ancestor. I was just wondering if anyone has done research into what Marquette and Joliet were really looking for??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Brandon,

      There is no doubt in my mind the Church was in hot pursuit of the Templars and were well aware of their activities in North America. I think some of the clergy sent over here were trying to access what the Templars were up to. They had other orders as well, such as trying to convert the natives to Catholicism, but you can be sure the Templars were on their minds as well.

      Delete
  9. Mr. Walters
    I love your work and find it compelling. I follow it religiously.
    my wife is an anthropology student and one of her professor have a lecture on KRS. She claimes it is a fake of course based on bacterial evidence on the stone. Have you ever heard of this study and whats you analysis of the results. Thank you

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unknown,

      Bacterial evidence? That’s the silliest thing I’ve ever heard. Please tell your wife to tell the professor to give up on that weak argument. Uff da…

      Delete
  10. The Templars must be stopped. They are feminizing the American male. Give little boys drugs that block puberty and sterilizes them. Look at I Am Jazz. Poor kid doesn't know what the Templars did from the very beginning. Boys in dresses. THAT is the plan. Sacred feminine to end all wars because girls know better. There is where you need to go. Stoneholes are feminine and that is part of it all.


    Toni Halfit

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Toni,

      I think you're getting a little carried away don't you? You might want to read your comments a couple of times before submitting. OK?

      Delete
    2. I am sorry. I did not mean to be a spoiler for your project. I am with you on this. Men will be gone within two generations. You will be the one to expose ALL. I have faith in you.


      Toni

      Delete
    3. Toni,

      We have to be careful and balanced in how we investigate this history and how we present it. It's fun to speculate throw out ideas, but I have to be as clear and concise as I can. I'm trying my best to get it right.

      Delete
  11. Hello Scott,
    Thank you for telling me about the book about the St.Clair family. I would like to know more about this family. I believe that Jesus had a bloodline and the Knight Templar know about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Glenna,

      There is no question the Templars knew all about Royal bloodline; many of those knights were direct descendants themselves. You can be sure this knowledge would have been passed down through these families. In fact, these families still exist to this day and many of the names would be familiar to us all.

      Delete
  12. Orion's Belt rising vertically = 3 Mothers

    Orion's Belt fully risen = 3 Fathers

    Orion's Belt setting vertically = 3 Mothers

    Then imagining Orion's Belt at the 6 o'clock position = 3 Father's

    This is part of my current interpretation of the Tree of Life.
    I'm thinking this may be a navigation system. With 60 degrees between Sirius and the Pleiades, the 30-degree point would be in Orion. In "Stellar Theology & Masonic Astronomy" R.H. Brown discusses both numbers in relation to a symbol consisting of a circle bracketed by four lines. Each line being 60 degrees. For me, it's not hard to imagine one of these lines being the 60° between Sirius and the Pleiades.

    Anthony Warren

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hi Scott, from one of your earlier replies here, I'm now wondering who's allegiance you believe the possible Cistercian monk and inscriber of the 1362 KRS was to: his proposed comrades, post-Templars, or the Catholic Church? This is not a trick question.

    To disagree with Hjalmar Holand, along with many others now, I tend to believe that the proposed Sir Paul Knutson search party never arrived in MN, so that all the evidences compiled from the several categories of evidences (metal weapons, stoneholes and petroglyphs) should, in fact, be attributed to several medieval Scandinavian expeditions. The question naturally arises: who made these earlier or later medieval visits?

    If you don't mind, I would like to suggest the possibility that some of these expeditions were made in the name of the same Catholic Church as the supposed Cistercian monk was representing...unless he was more in league with the post-Templars, if they were involved, as we may think.

    As you are aware, Scott, there is a bit of evidence to suggest another Catholic presense here, perhaps slightly before or after the 1362 expedition, that of course being the Sauk Lake Altar Rock (formerly called the Viking Altar Rock). Two horizontally made stoneholes about a foot apart and waist-high suggest a Catholic altar and Mass, much as the Newport Tower--a defensive Scandinavian round church (according to Holand), also bears evidence of a past Catholic altar.

    So, we can see a heavy Catholic Church influence with all three of these medieval evidences, the KRS, the Altar Rock and the Newport Tower, yet we do not know when the Altar Rock was made, nor the Newport Tower, for sure. But, another question now comes to mind: were proposed monks or priests for these other expeditions--besides the KRS expedition--representing the Catholic Church...or Templars...or post-Templars?

    This could get quite confusing, trying to understand true historic relationships here in medieval America between the traditional Catholic Church hierarchy, Templars, monks/priests, post-Templars...and Native Americans, too, and at slightly different, evolving periods of time. This will not be easy to sort out, Scott, because it involves uncertain and unknown alligiances, and unknown and uncertain dates (except for the KRS).

    Anyway, I know we both believe a historic land-claim is involved with all this mystery and intrigue. I myself think that some expeditions (plural) were made to make land-claims and a few others were likely made to attempt to reacquire the same. Unfortunately, we know very little about earlier or later medieval expeditions to this region, such as with the Sauk Lake Altar Rock and now, too, the proposed "Norse Code-Stone" I found in 2015.

    (By the way, I'm scheduled to give a presentation about the Norse Code-Stone this coming September in Park Rapids, MN. I'll be giving a PowerPoint presentation and showing a 20-minute video of the Code-Stone site near Appleton, MN, showing clearly the differences between modern late-1800's stoneholes (which are very large) and medieval Scandinavian stoneholes, which as you know are slightly triangular-shaped and usually quite aged-appearing. Both stonehole types exist at the same site, which will be helpful for any future age-comparison studies.)

    - Gunn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gunn,

      The one thing I can always count on from you is a hope and belief the Roman Catholic Church played some kind of role in the creation of the Kensington inscription. In fact, they did. It was their persecution of the Templars/Cathar/Venus Families Goddess ideology that in large part drove these people to create the New Jerusalem in North America. The Kensington Rune Stone land claim was a huge part of that effort.

      However, that was the only role they played and any suggestion otherwise is only wishful thinking.

      Good luck with you presentation. I will also be speaking about the KRS and the Templars in Minnesota in September. The date is still being set.

      Delete
    2. Gunn and Scott.

      The only way I can see the Roman Catholic Church contributing to this enterprise other than the persecution mentioned by Scott, is the brief times the church was infiltrated and run by Templar families. Ruggerio Marino makes a convincing case for one such period, in his book "Christopher Columbus the Last Templar" Marino points out the symbol of the Cybo family as the peacock. Which also happens to be the symbol for the NBC Television Network.

      Best regards to both,

      Anthony Warren

      Delete
  14. Well, maybe this can all be broken down to just "Christianity," rather than to originations of particular branch-offs of the Roman Catholic Church. By this, I mean, the Newport Tower, the KRS and the Altar Rock all bear evidence of being Christian in nature. All bear Christian features, whether we choose to ascribe these features to the Catholic Church, Templars, monks or anyone else.

    To myself: It's easy to get mired down looking at the Catholic Church, Templars, Cathars or Scottish post-Templars and trying to determine whether or not they were "Christians." Goddess worship is definately not Christian. However, Templars by most accounts were considered Christians protecting and fighting for the Holy Land. The French Cathars believed in laying on of hands to receive the Holy Ghost, yet other beliefs made them seem "un-Christian."

    Some Christians have always questioned Catholicism because of some of their doctrines, yet one can certainly come to "salvation" through the Catholic Church as much as past Templars could be "saved" through their beliefs, even if off somewhat. There is no question but that Cathars could come to a saving knowledge of Jesus, though many of their doctrines were questionable. Everything will be perfect later on, not here on Earth.

    What I hope we don't miss is that the evidences show that Christianity was the prevailing umbrella overhanging at least some of the medieval expeditions to America's East Coast, and to Minnesota. To me again: we will need to be careful not to too-quickly excommunicate these various Christian contenders of the Faith, because there are many ways of coming to God through Jesus; He will help sort out the worthwhile and un-worthwhile doctrines in the by-and-by.

    Thanks for letting me put in my two-cents worth again; may we continue to have a peaceful and sharing relationship.

    -Gunn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gunn,

      Whatever floats your boat is fine with me.

      Delete
  15. It's pretty easy to look at Jesus. As long as you're wearing a welder's maak. One really shouldn't gaze upon the full glory of the Lord. You'll damage your retina.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous,

      I think we'll just have to agree to disagree when it comes to the divinity of Jesus.

      All good.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous,

      Thanks for the laugh. If you're talking about staring into the sun, I happen to agree. Personally looking forward to the eclipse, and I'll use just such a mask.

      Regards,

      Anthony Warren

      Delete