Dark Ages Is a Cover-up of Christ’s Millenium Reign through His body of believers, the “Living Stones built up a habitation of God in the Spirit. For scripture states that Satan would be released for a final rebellion after the Millennial Reign. To mean that Perspectives would change so that people would believe “the coming one who is according to (new lies presented) sata

This was done to help disguise the Thousand Year Reign of the Body of Christ with Him as the head and the Cheif cornerstone. That “we are living stones assembled a body of Christ in the Spirit, as having nothing to do with physical churches.

If you can understand this correctly,  you will see that the Millennium Reign of Christ has to do with Him being the head and we are His body of believers. And that the Thousand year Reign has to do with us, of which even Catherdrals and churches can be mis-directors from truth, then you can understand  the “Millennium Reign of Christ”.

Weather these accounts are fully accurate or just in part, they demonstrate that, what is presented to us today as fact, is a collection of myths and outright lies. Below are just a few collaborating articles showing things are not as clear cut as we’ve been made to believe.

Article 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography)

The Dark Ages is a term, now deprecated (to mean antiquated and obsolete) by most historians, for the Early Middle Ages (c. 5th–10th centuries), or occasionally the entire Middle Ages (c. 5th–15th centuries =1000 yrs), in Western Europe after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, which characterises it as marked by economic, intellectual, and cultural decline.

The concept of a “Dark Age” as a historiographical periodization originated in the 1330s with the Italian scholar Petrarch, who regarded the post-Roman centuries as “dark” (because of a lack of advancements or historical proof of  technology or historical accounts)   compared to the “light” of classical antiquity.^[1][2] The term employs traditional light-versus-darkness imagery to contrast the era’s supposed darkness (ignorance and error) with earlier and later periods of light (knowledge and understanding).^[1] The phrase Dark Age(s) itself derives from the Latin saeculum obscurum, originally applied by Caesar Baronius in 1602 when he referred to a tumultuous period in the 10th and 11th centuries.^[3][4] The concept thus came to characterize the entire Middle Ages as a time of intellectual darkness in Europe between the fall of Rome and the Renaissance, and became especially popular during the 18th-century Age of Enlightenment.^[1] Others, however, have used the term to denote the relative scarcity of written records regarding at least the early part of the Middle Ages.

As the accomplishments of the era came to be better understood in the 19th and the 20th centuries, scholars began restricting the Dark Ages appellation to the Early Middle Ages;^[1][5][6] today’s scholars maintain this posture.^[7] The majority of modern scholars avoid the term altogether because of its negative connotations, finding it misleading and inaccurate.^{[8][9][10][11][12]} Despite this, Petrarch’s pejorative meaning remains in use,^[13][14][15] particularly in popular culture, which often oversimplifies the Middle Ages as a time of violence and backwardness.^[16][17]“

To which we say, what perfect cover-ups for expanding history , to blame violence and back-wardness, to defray those looking for proof, as we see in these next accounts.

Byzantine lies and cover-ups

The term “Byzantine lies and cover-ups” generally refers to the complex, often duplicitous, nature of diplomacy, nopolitics, and historical narratives associated with the Eastern Roman Empire. The Byzantines were known for using sophisticated, sometimes deceptive, tactics in warfare, such as bribery, trickery, and non-engagement strategies designed to win with minimal casualties. Key Aspects of Byzantine Deception and Historical Cover-ups: Political Intrigue: The Byzantine court was notorious for internal power struggles, with plots and conspiracies often hidden from the public, such as the case in 1067 when Romanos Diogenes faced execution for suspected rebellion, mirroring his father’s fate. Military Strategy: Emperor Leo VI’s Taktika emphasized using diplomacy and “other means” over direct combat to protect the army, which was often viewed by contemporaries as a form of deceit. Historical Revisionism: Modern perspectives suggest that much of the “Byzantine” reputation for being “unnecessarily complex” or deceitful stems from early modern, often biased, historical narratives. Physical Cover-ups: Evidence suggests that many Byzantine monuments in Istanbul (formerly Constantinople) have been covered up or destroyed over time, with limited artifacts from the city’s 37 shipwrecks, found in 2005, on display, and historic gardens being replaced by modern development. Literary Deception: The historian Procopius, for instance, wrote The Secret History, which was a scathing, hidden account contradicting his own public praises of Emperor Justinian and Empress Theodora. Contextual Factors: “Byzantine” as a Term: The term “Byzantine” itself is sometimes considered a derogatory, 19th-century invention to describe the Eastern Romans, who referred to themselves as Romans (Rhomaioi).

2.The Roman Empire transitioned into the Byzantine Empire, spanning roughly from Rome’s imperial start (27 BCE) through the fall of its Western half (476 CE) and continuing as the Eastern Roman/Byzantine Empire until 1453 CE, when Constantinople fell to the Ottomans; so, while Rome (West) ended in 476, Byzantium (East) carried on the Roman legacy for another thousand years, centered in Constantinople. Roman Empire (Classical) Start: Generally considered 27 BCE with Augustus, though it evolved from the Roman Republic. Key Event: The Empire was officially divided into Eastern and Western halves in 395 CE. End (West): 476 CE, when the last Western Roman Emperor was deposed. Byzantine Empire (Eastern Roman) Start: Often dated from the division in 395 CE, or 330 CE when Constantine founded Constantinople as a new capital (Nova Roma). Identity: Its people called themselves Romans, and it was the continuation of the Roman Empire in the East. End: May 29, 1453 CE, with the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks. In essence, Byzantium was the Roman Empire for much of its later history, preserving Roman traditions, law, and culture in the East long after Rome itself had fallen.