Solomon's Treasure SOURCEBOOK - Book - Page 32
30
THE SEARCH FOR KING SOLOMON’S TREASURE SOURCEBOOK
154
NOTE: Wheatley quotes these directions and then ignores them to attempt to lead to the Malay Peninsula which was proven false as Ophir especially by
the Portuguese who first occupied the area yet continued searching for Ophir elsewhere. Magellen specifically identified the Philippines as Ophir/Chryse and
Tarshish/Argyre. So many authors on this topic continue to ignore the Philippines exists yet these directions are obvious. In fact, just about every reference
including Ptolemy rule out the Malay Peninsula as it is not an island and this was well known even by him, Josephus and others. They did not know the isles
of the Philippines yet before the Common Era but they would. To go backwards in progressing thought and pull out places already eliminated is backwards
reasoning. No actual modern scholarship could possibly lead to the Malay Peninsula which was proven not to be Ophir despite the British attempt at academic
fraud to continue to propagate a dead claim. The Beatus Map further ties Ophir/Chryse to the Garden of Eden which we see often. Obviously, the Rivers of
Paradise cannot be such modern rivers as they originate in precipitation and Gen. 2:5 says there was no rain before the Flood thus they did not exist. Also, it
fails to recognize the largest river, the River From Eden itself as most so-called theories do. The Garden of Eden was located when Ophir was found.
154. 1. “The surueye of the vvorld...” Dionysius, Periegetes. By Thomas Twyne. 1543-1613. Chap. Of the
Ilandes in the Oceane. Parts 4 and 5. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A20492.0001.001/1:5.4?rgn=div2;view=fulltext
2. “Monsoon Winds to the “Land of Gold.” Authoring Institution: California University, Berkeley. Office of
Resources for International and Area Studies.” P. 38. citing “The Golden Khersonese.” Paul Wheatley, P.
131-133. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED460920
