Suggestive and Compelling
Archeologic Evidence
Some time ago I wrote two
articles one called The Nine Commandments
of the Los Lunas Decalogue Stone and a following article called the Puerco River Ark of the Covenant, I
had thought of just including the
latter but the first of these two lends credence to the latter, perhaps you
will see it and perhaps you won’t, but my reasoning for pointing this out is to
simply say, regardless of what I have written in the articles, my belief today
is that the Los Lunas Stone was carved by cultures who visited the Americas
around 775-1050 AD, NOT by the earliest Native Americans. The earliest
likelihood in which it could have been carved is about 100 BC, but I lean
towards a much later date. Here are the two articles.
The Nine Commandments
and the Los Lunas Decalogue Stone
Historically
we have always been taught of the Ten
Commandments in almost every work pertaining to the subject reference is always
made as “the Ten Commandments,” but
do we really have anything from a credible source that says specifically how
many commandments were given on the two tablets? Only 3 times in the King James
Bible does it say specifically Ten
Commandments? Although there are hundreds of Commandments we will only
focus on the supposed Ten.
In
looking at the accepted version of Ten Commandments we have;
Exodus 20:1-17
1 AND
God spake all these words, saying,
2 I [am] the LORD thy God, which have brought
thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
3 Thou
shalt have no other gods before me.
4 Thou
shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that
[is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the
water under the earth:
5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them,
nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the
iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth
[generation] of them that hate me;
6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them
that love me, and keep my commandments.
7 Thou
shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not
hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
8 Remember
the saboth day, to keep it holy
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy
work:
10 But the seventh day [is] the 526rayish of the LORD thy God: [in it] thou
shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor
thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that [is] within thy gates:
11 For [in] six days the LORD made heaven and
earth, the sea, and all that in them [is], and rested the seventh day:
wherefore the LORD blessed the 526rayish day, and hallowed it.
12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that
thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
13 Thou
shalt not kill.
14 Thou
shalt not commit adultery.
15 Thou
shalt not steal.
16 Thou
shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
17 Thou
shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s
wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any
thing that [is] thy neighbour’s.
Seems
pretty cut and dry doesn’t it? In the Catholic Bible they have simply removed
the second commandment for reasons so very obvious of which is part of
the first, and divided the 10th commandment to keep the appearance
of the traditional ten. But let’s look at it from another
perspective in which does not take away from the content or meaning. Let’s look
at this from the perspective of sin. What is the sin associated with the
Commandment?
# 1, Sin, Worship of another God other than
THEE God.
#2, The sin is the same as #1, be it a false
God, wrong God or one made with our hands it is the same and therefore
constitutes One commandment given in 3 parts.
# 3 Sin, Taking the Lords Name in Vain. Not cursing which is one
of the dumbest thing I have heard, but using the Lords name to get gain.
# 4. Sin, Not Remembering the Sabbath.
# 5 Sin, Not glorifying thy Father and thy Mother ABOVE.
#6 Sin, Shedding of “Innocent” blood.
#7 Sin, Adultery, Giving your love to another
who has no right to it, it has nothing to do with sex.
#8 Sin, Stealing, taking what does not belong
to you.
#9 Sin, Bearing False witness of which you
were no witness to.
#10 Sin, Coveting that which does not belong
to you, which is given in 2 parts.
Number
one and two are part of the same commandment.
Having no other God before him includes every form of God out there
whether false, graven image, or the wrong God.
I
have heard some argue that they are two separate commandments because each
starts with “Thou Shalt Not” and if this is the case are we saying Verse 5
above is a new and separate commandment? Are we saying those which do not have
“Thou
Shalt Not” preceding them are not commandments? It is suspect by me
that the first Commandment is a creation of man long ago as the 2nd
covers the same, and the purpose of this creation was to eventually eliminate
the second part to justify themselves and leaving the first in its place.
Now
I don’t know what school you went to, But I was taught that Jesus Christ is a
God, part of the Godhead, and that
our Father put him before himself, of his own doing, as a Savior to the world who
agreed to give the glory to his Father,
and that we do, be it by prayer, ordinances, covenants etc, done in the name of
Jesus Christ. If this isn’t putting a God Before God the Father I don’t know
what is, so is our Father a Hypocrite or is it more likely that someone didn’t
think this through? If the first commandment as we know it were from God, what
Gods was he referring to?
We
know there are other Gods out there who have their own creations but we have
never been taught of them other than their existence or come to know any of
them in any way whatsoever, and if you made the choice to worship one of these
Gods you know nothing about, do you think they would in anyway acknowledge you,
being a true God? So if our God is the creator of this so called first
commandment, what would he have meant? Well the only Gods left are false Gods,
creations of our minds and are usually manifest by those who create them in the
form of Statues, Idols and the creations of their hands and is this not covered
in what we know as the second commandment? The first commandment is pointless
unless you needed a scapegoat. What we know as the first commandment is a
fabrication of man in ancient times; it is not needed and does not change the
fact that we should have no other false
God before him or what we know as the Trinity.
There
are only nine commandments and why have I brought this up? The reason is to
give credibility to the Los Lunas Stone in the following section in that it
does not have mistakes as so many supposed experts and students of Hebrew have
said, it is THEM who is in error and mistaken not the scribe of the stone and I
intend to show you this is true which hopefully in the end we will have just
one more evidence of ancient Hebrew in the Western regions and to show that someone
in the past knew what the scholars of today do not. And there is another reason
which will shortly come, the Puerco River Glyph.
The
Los Lunas Stone
Los
Lunas Stone as it appeared before someone
recently
got offended
The
Los Lunas Decalogue Stone is said to have been originally discovered in the
1880’s but not officially until it was shown to Frank C Hibben an archaeologist
and anthropologist of New Mexico, the very archaeologist who wrote the document
called Frozen Muck which I included
in the book Nephite North. It is said that it was heavily covered in Lichen and
patina when Hibben first saw it; many have discredited the find as a hoax of
course because of things such as the repeated cleaning of it and re scratching
of the characters and chalking for photos, but more so because of the so called
Mistakes and errors found within the
text that according to the so called experts, would not have been made. I would agree 100% that a Levitical
Scribe or a scribe with knowledge of the Paleo Hebrew would not have made the
so called mistakes and errors pointed out. The difference is, I don’t think the
scribe made any mistake and it is those who think they have a clear
understanding of the Paleo Hebrew or Hebrew who is in error, and those who
attempted to change the content.
“The archaeologist Ken Feder points
out that “the flat face of the stone shows a very sharp, crisp inscription...”.
His main concern however is the lack of any archaeological
context. He argues that to get to the location of the stone would have
required whoever inscribed it to have “stopped along the
way. Encamped, eaten food, broken things, disposed of trash, performed rituals,
and so on. And those actions should have left a trail of physical
archaeological evidence across the greater American Southwest, discovery of
which would undeniably prove the existence of foreigners in New Mexico in
antiquity with a demonstrably ancient Hebrew
material culture...” and states that “There are no
pre-Columbian ancient Hebrew settlements, no sites containing the everyday
detritus of a band of ancient Hebrews, nothing that even a cursory
knowledge of how the archaeological record forms would demand there would be.
From an archaeological standpoint, that’s plainly impossible.”
Wow,
I couldn’t even begin to show the blindness of this man, No Hebrew settlements?
Does this man read or just listen to all he was taught by his peers? So who
were these Indians with more knowledge of the Hebrew ways than anyone ever
expected and documented by dozens of the earliest explorers long before Feder’s
G G Great Grand Father was even a thought. Encamped,
eaten food, etc…? And of the 50 million acres surrounding the site Mr.
Feder has personally search all of it? Didn’t anyone show him the ruins on the
hill above? If this was the landing place
of a certain band of Hebrews by a sea faring ship how are we going to find their trash along the way? What kind
of trash should we be looking for? Evian plastic bottles? Forgive me but,
Ignorance is no proof of Intelligence…
One
only need take a close look to see that whoever the scribe was, he had
knowledge that the supposed experts of today do not have. For this reason I am
going to talk about the supposed commandment # 5 Thou Shalt Honor thy Mother and Father. In a video that my good
friend Alan sent to me, concerning the Los Lunas stone, a student of Hebrew
points out a few “mistakes” according
to him but never really expounds upon what exactly the mistake is except for
the 5th commandment. When he is asked what it actually says he
struggles trying to tell us what it Should
say until the host of the video impatiently asks him again, specifically what
it actually says. With this the student of Hebrew again struggles and says, it says Honor thy Father and thy Mother….
ABOVE!
When
I heard this I knew that our understanding of the scriptures for near 2000
years is what is in error. At this time I would point out one other mistake
which has existed for a very long time, the words are not Honor your, it is Glorify you.
In other words, YOU glorify Father and Mother above.
Why do men always suppose they know more about the ancient writings than those
who wrote them? Since when would our Father instruct us to give glory to
another man, before God? Does this not violate the 1st commandment? It is what it is…. Now the problem is,
who is our Mother above, and did the ancients know her? Why don’t we? The reasons
I have been given my whole life just make no sense, and I am sure that many
will come to my rescue to save me from my fallen state and explain to me what
the scripture “really mean.”
My
friend and I talked about this for some time, the question was brought, if the
scripture meant honor OR glorify thy earthly
father and mother then we have a problem. Now my Father has also instructed me
by way of commandment to forsake ALL evil, so, hypothetically speaking if my
earthly father was a foul dishonest man, a thief, a murderer and oppressor of
the poor and the week, and I did not honor him because of his evils, am I now
guilty of the sin of Commandment #5? I don’t think so. And if I did Honor or Glorify him, in other words, worship
him or give glory to him, am I now
guilty of commandment #1? In looking at
the meaning of the word Honor or Glorify among the many implicating words which
describe it, is to Worship. Although this seemed very convincing, it wasn’t
completed for me until I stumbled upon a couple of scriptures from the lips of
Christ himself that I knew the ancient scribe who carved the Los Lunas Stone
was not only authentic, but knew more about Paleo Hebrew and his scriptures
than the so called experts of today.
In
the following Jesus shows the Pharisees and scribes the error of their ways without
telling them what it actually means. He shows them by their own understanding
they contradict themselves but it is the fact that Jesus himself says in the
following, God Commanded.
Matthew
15:4
4 For God
commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
Interestingly
enough the Greek translation for the above does not say Honor thy father and mother, it says, Be valuing THE Father and Mother. And again he says the same
basic thing in Mark 7:10, the point being, what kind of God would condemn me to
death for worshiping a false God, putting another God before him? What kind of
God would put me to death for cursing an earthly father or mother whether I had
reason or not? I know the answer, do you? This doesn’t sound like a God I want
to worship.
God
is a title, not a name, and my God encompasses my Father and Mother above and
including my Lord and Savior. I have no doubt that My Father above wants me to Honor him, and glorify him as in worship,
and my Mother in Heaven also who are among the only ones who are “Honorable” PERIOD. Are we here to give
glory to our earthly parents?
The
scribe who wrote the inscription of the Los Lunas Panel knew exactly what he
wrote. Mistakes are made with pens and by the quick action of them, and lack of
knowledge, the mistakes the scribe is accused of simply do not occur, do they
mean for me to believe the scribe carved the entire row of characters chiseling
away stepping back and blowing off the dust and then said OOPS?.. I don’t think so. However I could admit the
scribe could have made one mistake in that he began to write the second part of
the first commandment, or was it a mistake? And the scribe supposedly had to “Insert” the missing potion between the
first and second line of the inscription? Hmmm, something stinks here…
It
is said that the earliest known use
of an insertion mark or caret is 1681, my question is, why didn’t anyone
question the one found in 1681? Is its use in the Los Lunas stone evidence of
the very earliest known use of the Caret? Evidence of a fraud, or evidence of
someone in recent years attempting to change what an original inscription said
because it did not fit their agenda or to render it a hoax and not
understanding that the use of the Caret is likely a modern invention? Is it possible that “Thou Shalt have no other God before me” was added in at a modern
date as it was not necessary to even be a part of the commandment as the commandment would have been complete
without it. It is my opinion that the second line was added by someone in
modern times, likely some Spaniard of the Catholic Faith who adhered to words
of an altered Bible.
If
you look close at the method of application of the glyphs there is a difference
in style for a lack of better words, between the 2nd line and the
rest of the panel, look closely at the Lamed
symbol. In the entire panel all of the Lamed symbols either join at the point
of the vertical and horizontal line, or a small gap is left BELOW the vertical line and ABOVE the horizontal. In the second line suspect
of being added at a more modern date, the gap is not below the vertical line,
but to the side in two of the three occurrences. This difference implies a different author. Now why would
someone do this? Interestingly enough two of the mistakes mentioned would have been done by the author of the added
line. Another interesting observance is, that some time in 2007, someone
visited the site with a portable grinder and removed the first line, why only
the first line? I hate to point this out to those responsible but isn’t this
like tearing the pages from the scriptures so that it no longer applies?
Regardless, it did not change a thing. One
often meets their destiny on the road they take to avoid it.
It
is my opinion due to common sense, if I approached a rock face with the intent
to scribe something as important as the commandments and not knowing how
exactly it was going to fit on the rock, I would not just sit down and start
chiseling away. I would however plan what I was going to do and I would grab
some charcoal from one of those nonexistent Hebrew debris piles, and lay the
whole thing out first, then chisel the lines, do you think the scribe might
have noticed mistakes if there were any? The following picture is what I truly
believe the panel once looked like before someone got to it in the ancient past and
took offense because it did not matched their altered Bible, or saw the threat
of exposing a little plot; Manifest Destiny takes upon new meaning.
I am Jehovah Elohim your God who has brought
you out of the land of Egypt from the house of slaves. (1) You shall not make
idols. (2) You shall not use the name Jehovah in vein. (3) Remember the day of
the Sabbath and keep it Holy.
(4) Honor Father and Mother above that your
days will be long on the earth that Jehovah Elohim your God has given you. (5)
You must not murder, (6) you must not commit adultery, (7) you must not steal,
(8) you must not give false testimony, (9) you must not covet your neighbors
wife, nor that which he has.
Who
would know more about the message inscribed on the stone? An ancient scribe or
today’s so called experts? It is because of the things described previously
that tells me this panel was inscribed some time prior to the creation of
Catholicism or even possibly BC times. Was there a 10th Commandment?
We may never know but from the perspective of those who inscribed the Los Lunas
stone, there were 9, interestingly enough, according to those who inscribed the
stone in the next chapter, there were only 9 as well.
It says
what it says, and means what it means; it
is what it is… It was because of the following chapter that caused me to reevaluate
the Los Lunas Stone. The possibilities are many, but I guess no one is willing
to look at the other possible perspectives. If there are mistakes in the Los
Lunas inscription, it is from modern man, just my two cents. Continued in...