Ziusudra (Old Babylonian Akkadian: 𒍣𒌓𒋤𒁺, romanized Ṣíusudrá; Neo-Assyrian Akkadian: 𒍣𒋤𒁕, romanized Ṣísudda; Ancient Greek: Ξίσουθρος, Xísouthros) of Shuruppak is named in the WB-62 recension of the Sumerian King List as the final king of Sumer before the Great Flood. He later appears as the hero of the Eridu Genesis and is identified in the writings of Berossus under the name Xisuthros.

The First Council of Nicaea (pronounced ny-SEE-uh; Greek: Sýnodos tês Nikaías) was a gathering of Christian bishops called by the Roman emperor Constantine I in Nicaea—a city in Bithynia (modern İznik, Turkey). It met from May through late July 325.

As the church’s first ecumenical council, it marked an early effort to build unity across Christianity by bringing together leaders from throughout the empire. Hosius of Corduba likely presided. With at least 200 bishops present, the council’s chief achievements were defining the Son’s relationship to the Father in response to controversy, drafting the opening portion of the Nicene Creed, establishing a common method for determining the date of Easter, and issuing early church canons (rules of discipline).

Background

The Alexandrian controversy (Arian dispute)

The council was largely prompted by a theological conflict in Alexandria over who Jesus is in relation to God the Father. Scholars commonly date the start of the dispute to sometime between 318 and 322. The main figures were Alexander, bishop of Alexandria, and Arius, a presbyter.

Alexander taught that the Son is eternally generated from the Father. Arius and his supporters argued instead that the Father alone is eternal and that the Son was brought into being by the Father—meaning the Son had a beginning and was therefore subordinate. Arius also accused Alexander of leaning toward Sabellianism, which treated Father, Son, and Spirit as one person rather than distinct.

A local synod of bishops from Egypt and Libya supported Alexander. Arius refused its ruling and was excommunicated and exiled from Alexandria. He then sought support across the eastern churches through letters and travel. Prominent supporters included Eusebius of Nicomedia and Eusebius of Caesarea, while Alexander circulated letters defending his position.

The Melitian schism

At the same time, the Alexandrian church faced a separate internal split led by Melitius of Lycopolis. During the persecutions, Melitius had taken on roles associated with Alexandria’s leadership; after 311 he refused to surrender ordination authority or recognize the authority of Alexander and earlier Alexandrian successors.

Constantine and the council’s convening

In 324, Constantine defeated Licinius and became sole ruler of the empire. Around this time, he learned of the Alexandrian dispute (possibly through Eusebius of Nicomedia) and wrote to Alexander and Arius urging reconciliation.

Constantine sent Hosius of Corduba to Alexandria. Hosius apparently became involved first in discussions about the date of Easter, and later in calling a larger meeting of eastern bishops at Antioch, which backed Alexander and issued a statement of faith rejecting Arius’s ideas. After these efforts failed to restore unity, Constantine called a broader council. Although an earlier meeting may have been planned for Ancyra, Constantine relocated it to Nicaea, close to his residence at Nicomedia, making attendance easier and allowing him to be present—also fitting with celebrations for the twentieth year of his reign.

Attendance and setting

The imperial treasury covered travel and expenses. Ancient reports vary, but the traditional figure became 318 bishops, though surviving signature lists suggest roughly 200–220. With assisting clergy (presbyters and deacons), total attendance may have reached 1,200–1,900.

Most bishops came from the eastern provinces, with smaller western representation (including Hosius and delegates associated with Rome). The council met in the imperial palace at Nicaea, likely in a basilica-style hall.

Overview of proceedings

Constantine opened the council with a formal entrance and delivered an introductory address in Latin. Hosius probably supervised the debates as Constantine’s representative. Constantine participated in discussion (in Greek) but did not vote as a bishop. Because no detailed official minutes survive, the exact sequence of debate is uncertain, though the council likely first resolved who could participate—such as bishops previously excommunicated at Antioch.

The bishops then debated a creed line by line, ultimately adopting a text that nearly all accepted. Alongside the Arian controversy, they addressed the Easter dating question, dealt with the Melitian schism, and issued twenty canons. The council concluded in early July, with bishops invited to Constantine’s twentieth-anniversary celebration on 25 July, and letters were circulated to announce the decisions.

Why it mattered as an ecumenical council

Nicaea is remembered as the first attempt to summon a council representing the whole church across the empire—what later writers called “ecumenical,” meaning “worldwide” in the sense of the inhabited world (largely the Roman world). It set a lasting model: major councils would define doctrine through creeds and regulate church life through canons, launching the era commonly counted as the first seven ecumenical councils.

The Nicene Creed (main outcome)

The council produced a creed that clearly defined the church’s faith and drew boundaries against Arian claims. It declared the Son to be:

• “true God from true God”

• “begotten, not made”

• “of one substance with the Father” (homoousios)

It concluded with anathemas rejecting statements such as “there was when he was not” and affirming the Son’s unchangeability.

Later, the creed was expanded at the Council of Constantinople (381).

Other major decisions

• Exile and enforcement: Arius and a small number of supporters refused to endorse the creed and were exiled; his writings were ordered destroyed.

• Easter: The council endorsed a unified approach associated with Rome and Alexandria and separated Christian computation from dependence on the Jewish calendar.

• Melitian schism: Melitius was restricted, his ordinations were regularized, and his group was subordinated to Alexandrian authority.

• Canon law: Twenty canons established early disciplinary norms for clergy and church order.

If you want, I can rewrite this again in a shorter “textbook paragraph” style or in a more modern/plain-English tone.

The Book of Enoch. Chapter 84.

Trey Knowles exposes The Wolf Church. The Wolf Church is a doctrine that teaches people to behave like wolves. It promotes the idea that you will always remain a sinner until Jesus returns. These wolves in sheep’s clothing deny the power of God and the pure righteousness available through Christ. They claim that believers do not have the power to say no to sin or yes to righteousness.

In Big Bad Wolf, Trey Knowles defines wolf behavior and exposes the techniques wolves use among humanity. Many people have witnessed “wolf behavior” in human form. Some have even been captured, controlled, or influenced by wolves disguised as people.

 Trey Knowles’ “3/5 of a Person”

 Trey Knowles – “True Nature and Behavior”

Cesare Borgia

Cesare Borgia (13 September 1475 – 13 March 1507) was an Italian Renaissance figure whose life bridged the worlds of church, war, and ruthless statecraft. Born in Subiaco in the Papal States, he was the illegitimate son of Pope Alexander VI and a central member of the powerful Borgia family. Initially destined for a career in the Catholic Church, Cesare later abandoned the cardinalate to pursue military and political power, becoming one of the most formidable condottieri of his age. His rise and fall would later inspire Niccolò Machiavelli’s political theories in The Prince.

Early Life

Cesare was born to Cardinal Rodrigo Borgia (later Pope Alexander VI) and Vannozza dei Cattanei. Like many Renaissance nobles, his exact birth year is disputed, though 1475 is most commonly accepted. He grew up alongside his siblings Giovanni, Lucrezia, and Gioffre Borgia, within a family that combined Spanish roots with immense influence in Italy.

The Borgias had risen rapidly in the 15th century, culminating in Rodrigo’s election as pope in 1492. Unlike most popes, Alexander VI openly acknowledged his children, clearing the way for Cesare’s rapid advancement.

Church Career and Resignation

Educated in Perugia, Pisa, and Rome, Cesare was groomed for ecclesiastical power from a young age. He became bishop and archbishop of several dioceses while still a teenager and was made a cardinal at just eighteen. Despite these honors, he had little interest in a clerical life.

The assassination of his brother Giovanni in 1497—under circumstances that remain mysterious—marked a turning point. With Giovanni gone, Cesare was free to pursue the military career he had long desired. In 1498, he resigned from the cardinalate, an extraordinary act at the time, and was formally released from his religious obligations.

Military and Political Rise

With the backing of his father and the support of France, Cesare entered the Italian Wars as a professional commander. King Louis XII granted him the title Duke of Valentinois, earning him the nickname Il Valentino. Cesare used French troops and papal authority to dismantle semi-independent lordships in central Italy, particularly in Romagna and the Marche.

Through conquest, betrayal, and calculated terror, he captured cities including Imola, Forlì, Rimini, Faenza, Urbino, and Camerino. By 1501 he had been named Duke of Romagna, ruling a newly consolidated state. While ruthless, his governance was often more orderly and effective than that of the petty tyrants he replaced.

One of his most infamous acts occurred in 1502, when he lured disloyal mercenary captains to a meeting in Senigallia and had them arrested and executed—an event later praised by Machiavelli as a masterstroke of political deception.

Decline After Alexander VI

Cesare’s power depended heavily on papal support. When Alexander VI died in 1503, Cesare was gravely ill and unable to secure his position during the papal transition. Although briefly supported by Pope Pius III, Cesare was soon undermined by the election of Pope Julius II, a longtime enemy of the Borgias.

Stripped of his territories and allies, Cesare was arrested in Naples, imprisoned in Spain, and transferred between fortresses. In 1506, he escaped and entered the service of the King of Navarre.

Death

In 1507, while besieging the castle of Viana in Navarre, Cesare pursued enemy troops during a storm and rode into an ambush. He was killed by a spear at the age of 31. His body was stripped and left nearly naked, a grim end for a man who had once dominated central Italy.

Burial and Legacy

Cesare was initially buried with honors in Viana, but his tomb was later destroyed, and his remains were moved multiple times over the centuries due to political and religious hostility. Today, he lies outside the Church of Santa María in Viana beneath a simple memorial stone.

Machiavelli and Historical Reputation

Cesare Borgia occupies a unique place in political thought. Machiavelli, who observed him firsthand, admired his decisiveness, strategic brilliance, and willingness to use cruelty when necessary. In The Prince, Cesare is presented as a model ruler undone not by lack of skill, but by misfortune and dependence on his father’s papacy.

Historians remain divided. Some view him as a proto-modern statesman; others see him as a symbol of Renaissance brutality. Either way, Cesare Borgia remains one of the most compelling—and controversial—figures of his era.

Personal Life

In 1499, Cesare married Charlotte of Albret, sister of the King of Navarre, with whom he had one legitimate daughter, Louise Borgia. He also fathered numerous illegitimate children. Contemporary accounts describe him as charismatic, volatile, tireless, and intensely ambitious—capable of charm and generosity one moment, and merciless violence the next.

Yaḥyā (عليه السلام) — known in the Bible as John the Baptist — is regarded in Islam as a noble prophet sent by God to guide the Children of Israel. His full name is Yaḥyā ibn Zakariyyā (John, son of Zechariah). He was the son of the prophet Zakariya (Zechariah) and a relative of Isa (Jesus), who is described in Islamic tradition as his maternal cousin.

Muslims believe that Yaḥyā was a witness to the Word of God and a herald of the coming of Isa al-Masih (Jesus the Messiah). He is mentioned five times in the Qur’an and is highly honored in Islamic tradition, especially within Sufism and Islamic mysticism, where his purity, wisdom, and devotion are emphasized.

Birth and Early Life

The Qur’an recounts that Zakariya prayed fervently for a child, despite his old age and his wife’s barrenness. In response to his prayers, God granted him a son named Yaḥyā — a name that, according to the Qur’an (19:7), had not been given to anyone before.

The angels announced the birth with the words:

“O Zachariah! We give you good news of a son whose name will be Yaḥyā — a name We have not given to anyone before.”

When Zakariya questioned how this could be possible given his age and his wife’s condition, he was told that nothing is difficult for God. As a sign of this miracle, Zakariya was unable to speak for three nights, despite being in good health.

Islamic exegesis (tafsir) holds that Yaḥyā and Isa were born approximately six months apart. Their births were seen as part of a divine plan to renew God’s message, which had been altered or neglected by portions of the Children of Israel.

The Qur’an describes Yaḥyā as:

• Granted wisdom while still a child

• Pure and compassionate

• Devout and God-fearing

• Kind to his parents

• Neither arrogant nor rebellious

Prophethood

Yaḥyā was instructed to hold firmly to the Scripture (the Torah) and was blessed with understanding and spiritual insight at a young age. Islamic tradition portrays him as exceptionally knowledgeable, even surpassing many scholars of his time in understanding the sacred texts.

The Qur’an states:

“O John! Hold firmly to the Scripture.” And We granted him wisdom while he was still a child. (Qur’an 19:12)

He is described as a righteous and humble prophet who strongly denounced sin and moral corruption. According to some Islamic traditions, Isa sent Yaḥyā with twelve disciples to preach before Jesus gathered his own followers.

Yaḥyā is also said to have delivered sermons at the Temple in Jerusalem (Al-Haram Ash-Sharif).

Assassination

Islamic tradition recounts that Yaḥyā openly opposed the ruler Herod Antipas when the latter sought to divorce his wife and marry his niece. Yaḥyā condemned the proposed marriage as unlawful and immoral.

As a result of his bold stance, he was imprisoned and eventually executed by beheading. It is widely believed in Islamic tradition that his head is buried within the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus.

Spiritual Significance

Yaḥyā holds a special place in Islamic spirituality. The Qur’an’s portrayal of his chastity, compassion, humility, and early wisdom has made him an important figure in Sufi teachings. His life is often cited as an example of purity, courage in speaking truth to power, and unwavering devotion to God.

Pope Alexander VI (Italian: Alessandro VI; Valencian: Alexandre VI; Spanish: Alejandro VI), born Roderic Llançol i de Borja around 1431 and later known as Rodrigo Borgia, served as pope from 1492 until his death in 1503. He was both head of the Catholic Church and ruler of the Papal States during the height of the Renaissance.

Born in Xàtiva, in the Kingdom of Valencia under the Crown of Aragon, Rodrigo came from the influential Borja (Borgia) family. He adopted his mother’s surname after the election of his uncle, Alonso de Borja, as Pope Callixtus III in 1455. Rodrigo studied law at the University of Bologna, earning a reputation as an outstanding jurist.

His uncle’s papacy accelerated his rise. Ordained deacon and made a cardinal in 1456, Rodrigo was appointed vice-chancellor of the Catholic Church a year later—a powerful and lucrative post he held for 35 years, serving under four popes. During this time, he amassed considerable wealth and influence within the Roman Curia.

In 1492, Rodrigo was elected pope and took the name Alexander VI. His pontificate was marked by assertive diplomacy, family advancement, and controversy. In 1493, his papal bulls—most notably Inter caetera—confirmed Spanish claims to newly discovered lands in the Americas following Christopher Columbus’s voyages, laying groundwork for the Treaty of Tordesillas.

Alexander VI pursued a foreign policy aimed largely at strengthening the position of his family. He supported his son Cesare Borgia as a military commander (condottiero), particularly during the Italian wars, and used papal authority to secure titles, lands, and advantageous marriages for his children.

He remains one of the most controversial Renaissance popes. Unlike many predecessors, Alexander openly acknowledged several children born to his mistresses, including Cesare, Giovanni, Lucrezia, and Gioffre. As a result, the name Borgia became synonymous with nepotism, political ambition, and moral excess, traits often associated—fairly or not—with his reign.

Despite scandal and opposition from reformers such as Girolamo Savonarola, Alexander VI proved to be an effective administrator who strengthened papal control over the Papal States and navigated the volatile politics of Renaissance Italy. He died in 1503, leaving behind a legacy that continues to fascinate historians for its blend of power, corruption, and statecraft.

The Kabbalah is a comprehensive scholarly study of Jewish mysticism, first published in 1929, in which A. E. Waite examines the esoteric traditions known as the “Secret Tradition in Israel.” Rather than serving as a sacred text itself, the work functions as a historical, theological, and mystical analysis of Kabbalistic thought and literature.

Waite’s study centers on foundational Kabbalistic sources such as the Zohar, the Sepher Yetzirah, and the doctrine of the Ten Sephiroth, commonly represented by the Tree of Life. Through these frameworks, the book explores how Kabbalah understands the nature of God, creation, and the relationship between the infinite and the finite.

In Kabbalistic theology, God is conceived as Ein Sof—the infinite, unknowable essence beyond human comprehension—who reveals Himself through the Sephiroth, divine emanations that structure both the cosmos and the human soul. Waite presents these ideas with an emphasis on their symbolic, metaphysical, and ethical dimensions rather than magical practice.

Widely regarded as a classic in Western esoteric scholarship, The Holy Kabbalah offers a balanced approach that combines academic rigor with mystical insight. It traces the historical development of Kabbalah, surveys its major texts, and assesses its enduring influence within Judaism and Western mystical thought.

Revelation 3:9 says I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you.

A growing claim in religious and historical discussions is that the ancient Israelites were Black, while the modern Israelites seen today are predominantly White. 

This idea raises strong emotions and controversy, often because it touches identity, faith, history, and race all at once. To understand where this claim comes from—and why it persists—we must separate biblical description, historical migration, genetic diversity, and modern political identity.

The reality is more complex than a simple “Black then, White now” narrative.

The Ancient Israelites: What Did They Look Like?

The ancient Israelites originated in the Levant, a crossroads between Africa, Asia, and Europe. This region historically produced people with brown to dark-brown skin tones, dark hair, and Semitic features—similar to many modern Middle Eastern and North African populations today.

Biblical descriptions do not provide precise racial categories as understood in modern times. Ancient texts describe people using clothing, culture, lineage, and covenant, not modern racial labels like “Black” or “White.” Importantly, race as we understand it today did not exist in the ancient world.

That said, it is historically accurate that ancient Israelites would not resemble modern Northern Europeans.

Africa and Israel: A Real Historical Connection

Africa played a significant role in biblical history:

Israel spent centuries in Egypt

Trade routes linked Israel to Nubia and Ethiopia

Intermarriage with surrounding peoples occurred

The Bible itself mentions Cushites (Africans) interacting with Israelites

Because of this, it is historically reasonable that some Israelites were dark-skinned, and Israelite populations likely ranged in appearance.

However, diversity does not mean uniform Blackness, nor does it exclude lighter-skinned individuals.

The Diaspora Changed Everything:

After repeated exiles—Assyrian, Babylonian, and later Roman—the Israelites were scattered across the known world. This dispersion, known as the Diaspora, radically altered the appearance of Jewish populations over time.

As Jewish communities settled in:

Europe

North Africa

The Middle East

Central Asia

they intermarried, adapted, and developed distinct ethnic subgroups. Over centuries, this produced Jewish populations with a wide range of skin tones.

This is where the modern image of “White Jews” largely comes from—especially from European Jewish communities who lived among Europeans for over a thousand years.

Modern Israel Is Not Ancient Israel:

A major source of confusion is the assumption that the modern State of Israel represents the same entity as ancient biblical Israel. It does not.

Ancient Israel was a covenant nation centered on law, temple worship, and tribal inheritance. Modern Israel is a political nation-state formed in the 20th century, composed of Jews returning from many different regions of the world.

Today’s Israeli population includes:

European Jews

Middle Eastern Jews

African Jews

Asian Jews

This diversity means no single racial appearance defines an Israelite today.

Why the “Black Israelites” Claim Persists

The claim that ancient Israelites were Black often emerges from:

Recognition that biblical people were not European

Historical erasure of African civilizations

Reactions against whitewashed religious imagery

Attempts to reclaim identity through scripture

While these concerns may stem from real historical injustices, they can become misleading when they insist on a single racial identity for all ancient Israelites.

History supports diversity, not racial replacement.

The Problem With Modern Racial Labels

Applying modern racial categories like “Black” and “White” to ancient people is anachronistic. These categories are social constructs developed thousands of years later, mainly in Europe.

Ancient identity was based on:

Tribe

Nation

Language

Covenant

Culture

Not skin color.

Conclusion

The idea that Israelites were once Black and are now White oversimplifies a deeply complex history. Ancient Israelites were a Semitic people from the Middle East, likely darker than Europeans but varied in appearance. Over centuries of exile and migration, Jewish populations became racially diverse.

Rather than a story of racial replacement, history tells a story of dispersion, intermixing, and survival.

Understanding this complexity honors both history and truth—without turning identity into a weapon.