by MrMoe 20 Replies latest jw friends
Sleepy
I havn't studied egypt much, but one artcle i read said that egypt started to decline after Akhenaten's monotheist reformations. It suggested that the polytheism w goddesses before that was better for the counrty as a whole. Any comments by those who know more about this issue?
SS
Hello people,
If you have a lot of interest in this subject there is a website that goes very deeply inot the development of the Hebrew and Christian religons. I will post some of the links.
Egypt and th eold testiment:
http://www.mystae.com/restricted/streams/thera/egypt.html
The Architect Imhotep
http://www.mystae.com/restricted/streams/scripts/imhotep.html
Biblical Beginnings in Canaan
http://www.mystae.com/restricted/streams/thera/canaan.html
Cult Practices in the Old Kingdom
http://www.mystae.com/restricted/streams/thera/cults.html
Sumerian Influence on Egypt
http://www.mystae.com/restricted/streams/scripts/influence.html
Hebrew Peoples in Egypt
http://www.mystae.com/restricted/streams/thera/hapiru.html
Moses and the Egyptian Priesthood
http://www.mystae.com/restricted/streams/scripts/moses.html
If you are not able to open these please let me know, I could copy them and put them into an e-mail and sen any one of them to you, they are quite interesting. Most of the websight is book quotes from scholars, arrcheloogists, and so forth.
There is a tonof info on this website in addition to what I have presented here, and much of it is restricted, but for a $10 US payment you can have lifetime of the sight access to it all.
Anyhow let me know if these work
Seedy
If you have cable, tune into the HISTORY channel tonight for, I think the third in the series, on "EGYPT" and origins of different religions.
sKally:
If man was supposedly created in gods image, then.....holy krap...we're all doomed.-sKallyWagger
Peace to you, Mr. Moe!
It would seem to ME that one who eventually became second only TO Pharaoh... would have, at some point, an Egyptian name. I am sure Moses had one, as it would seem illogical that the daughter of Pharaoh of HIS time would refer to her 'son' by his 'slave' name.
Many people had more than one name: Daniel, was also known by his Babylonian name of Belteshazzar; and the Hebrew young men, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah as Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego. My Lord, JAHESHUA (Joshua), was also known as Immanuel,
Others had their name changed: Abram to Abraham; Iscah (Sarai) to Sarah; Jacob to Israel; Saul of Tarsus to Paul; Simon Peter to Cephas. A few of the apostles were known by two names, as well.
It would seem quite reasonable to ME, then, that Joseph, as man who rose up in Egtyp, would at some point in canonized EGYPTIAN history, be referred to by an EGYPTIAN name. Does it not seem reasonable to you?
A slave of Christ,
SJ
Seedy - thanks for the links, I will have to read them this weekend.
Simon - I agree, much "accepted" history does need to be re-examined because much of it is based upon fantasy or facts twisted to the benefit of others or their God(s). On the Judean Copper Scroll, interesting point. Made me want to research it more and I ran across an interesting link...
http://www.vendyljones.org.il/copper.htm
The above link basically validates the authenticity of the scroll. What was the scroll? Basically a list of buried treasure. Some of the items listed in the scroll have been found. The Copper Scroll is really copper not papyrus, being that they wanted it to last. The letters/words on it were engraved on three sheets of copper that were fastened together making a single scroll.
AGuest - Much of Egyptian history is linked to the faith and history of the Isrealites of course. From these beliefs, modern Christianity came forth. The bible itself is taken from the dead-sea scrolls. So, how accurate are the accounts?
Kisses,
Moe
My dearest Moe-ly Girl... peace to you (and excuse the nickname... I have a habit of doing that...)
You asked:
Much of Egyptian history is linked to the faith and history of the Isrealites of course.I am not so sure of that. I mean, sure, SOME of Egyptian history, but since the Israelites only spent about 400 years there, and Egyptian history covers THOUSANDS of years, I am not sure just how much of an influence the former has on the latter.
From these beliefs, modern Christianity came forth.Which, the Hebrew beliefs or Egyptian ones? Also, it is true that modern 'false' christianity gets most of their beliefs from ancient Judaism, but that is because they ENTIRELY fail to 'hear' and get the SENSE of what is stated at 2 Corinthians 3:13-16:
"Therefore WE (those who are 'christians' in the
TRUE sense, by means of being ANOINTED/CHOSEN by
holy spirit...)
"... are using great FREENESS of speech and NOT
doing as when Moses would put a VEIL upon his
face, that the sons of Israel might NOT gaze
intently at the END of that which was to be
done away with (the Law Covenant, which was
done away with by means of Christ's fulfilling
it...)
"But THEIR mental powers (those who were
REQUIRED to live according to Law as well as
those who are NOT but think they HAVE to and
try to compel OTHERS to - which is most so-called
'christian' religions...)
"... were DULLED."
They simply couldn't/can't get the SENSE of what a TRUE 'christia' and TRUE 'christianity' really is. Why?
"For to this present day (and trust me,
even up to THIS day...)
"the SAME veil remains... UNLIFTED...
at the reading of the OLD covenant]
because IT... was DONE AWAY WITH... by means
of Christ.
In fact, down till this day, WHENEVER Moses
is read, A VEIL LIES... UPON THEIR HEARTS!
But... when there is a turning to the LORD
"the veil... IS TAKEN AWAY."
If they would 'hear', then, and get the sense of the NEW Covenant and the law of IT, love, they would not need to continuing being compelled and putting under compulsion to serve a fulfilled law, any, including themselves. But, obviously, they do not know HOW to 'walk in freedom', and so must be told, by laws written on stone and on paper in delible ink... how to do so.
The bible itself is taken from the dead-sea scrolls.I am not completely sure, but I think you err here. I believe that the Book of Isaiah and the fragments of others were found in the dead sea scrolls... and that many believe the modern to be accurate based on its close resemblence to what is in those scrolls. But the Bible canon as we know it is taken from many old and/or ancient documents, NONE of which are the originals.
So what? So, that fact that they are NOT the originals lends great credence to what my Lord said to me, that although:
"What I tell you IS written..." (and not necessarily in the "Bible"... or the Protestant version or Catholic version or Apochrypha, but even in other writing LONG lost to us)...
"Not everything that is WRITTEN... is what I will tell you."
Why is that? Because of the 'false stylus' of the secretaries, the copyists. The Bible(s) that we have today are the product of many, MANY copies over many, MANY thousands of years. And due to the imperfection of earthling man... not only his copying abilities, his comprehension of language and metaphor, but his HEART and desire to make 'true' what HE believes to be true, regardless of whether it is or not, MUCH has been 'tampered' with. That is why the warning in Revelation to those who add to... or take away... from that particular scroll. My Lord knew it would occur.
So, how accurate are the accounts?Some are completely accurate. Some are fairly accurate. Some are not so accurate. And some... are not accurate at all. That is why my Lord is recorded to have said at John 5:39, 40:
"You are searching the scriptures because you THINK
that by means of THEM you will have everlasting life.
And these are the VERY ones that bear witness ABOUT ME,
and yet, you do not want to come... TO ME... that you
might have life."
You want to understand what is TRUE, Mr. Moe? Then ASK the Truth.
John 14:6
And 'hear' when he says:
"Do NOT put your trust in earthling man...
in whom there is NO salvation."
I bid you peace, dear one, and ears to 'hear'.
A slave of Christ,
SJ
Thanks for the list, Seedy3.
It just so happens that I've been considering this topic this week.
Here's a fact:
Ptah was regarded as the pure Intellect which is the ultimate origin of all creation; and Thoth is the Tongue, the Word, by whom all creation came into existence. This is an early example of the Christian theology of the Word or Logos. In egypt this theology was found in the 20th Dynasty (1200 bc). Genesis was written prior to this, but John's mention of Logos was clearly not until the first century.
Sirona
I'm always interested when theology similar to the biblical is found that predates it. Do you wish to point to urls for that.
Thanks
SS
Well, rats!
It seems that every time something comes along that I'm really interested in that I'm already up to my rear in alligators and haven't time to do anything about it.
I'll try to say a little anyway. The trouble is that I'm constantly approaching subjects from a different angle than anyone else does. Guess I'm just the original odd-man-out.
Thanks to the different approaches, I've come to different conclusions than you suggest. I don't mean to imply that you are wrong or that I am right, as I feel that it is far too early in such an investigation to set anything in concrete. However, I'll give a brief description of my thoughts and how I got there.
I first became interested in this when I was a kid and we were studying the ten plagues in Egypt in the book study. This was back in the 50's somewhere. Most people would be commenting on the contents of the paragraphs or on some other aspect of the lesson. But I would be completely lost in my own thoughts on the subject and would not be even listening to what was said. There were two aspects of this that absolutely fascinated me.
The first was that for such a monumental calamity to come upon any world power at any time would be impossible to keep under wraps. There had to be a secular account of this somewhere. No, I did not doubt the Biblical account. I wanted to believe it, as incredible as the story was, and to find a secular account would be a big step in that direction. Plus, what was the aftermath? How did the Egyptian officials explain these events to their followers, the Egyptian people left behind? They couldn’t just ignore it. True, it would be a twisted account, but any account at all, twisted or not would be a verification of the Biblical one. When I finally found it I was delighted, for my idea of what the account might be like was surprisingly close. It was short, and it seems that the Egyptians, having been terribly abused by these barbarians who had been raping the whole country, had rallied and managed at great cost and effort to throw the invaders out. Yeah, right.
But there was something that fascinated me even more. Remember how Jehovah had Moses tell Pharaoh, “But, in fact, for this cause I have kept you in existence, for the sake of showing you my power and in order to have my name declared in all the earth.”? Each one of those plagues was a slap in the face to one of Egypt’s gods. This was done openly, contemptuously, and all of the common people could see it first hand. Theoretically speaking, the common people would be afraid, even deathly afraid not to worship this powerful new god. What would the priests do? This situation would be extremely hard to hide.
That the common people were not accustomed to "love" their gods was the common experience among the Egyptians and other nations around about. Love was deemed unnecessary. Obedience and fearful awe was what was demanded, so worshipping a new god would not be particularly
difficult for the citizenry.
And I found it. The book The Egyptian Book of the Dead by E. A. Wallis Budge is a record of the ancient Egyptian teachings about life after death. To read what the people of Moses day were forced to believe is enough to make one cry. They must have lived lives filled with nothing but terror and hopelessness.
But included in this book is a list of the main Egyptian gods and a description of who they were. To my utter delight I found that the largest write up of all was given to the god Amen who had, according to the author, “ . . . nothing whatsoever to do with the book of the dead; . . .” Shortly afterwards he goes on to explain: “When, however, the last kings of the XVIIth dynasty had succeeded in expelling the so-called Hyksos and had delivered the country from the yoke of the foreigner, their god assumed an importance hitherto unknown.” (Pages cxxvi and cxxvii) To then read the words of a hymn dedicated to the praising of this god Amen, some of which could have been lifted from the Bible itself, is to remove all doubt that one is looking at a corrupted worship of Jehovah. I found it extremely interesting to see how over the generations this worship was gradually corrupted further until it was nearly indistinguishable from the worship of the Egyptian sun god Ra.
According to what I read and in view of the above suggested series of events, I feel that all of the similarities you mention are easily explained by this forced introduction of Jehovah into the Egyptian culture. I have found practically no similarities in the two beliefs previous to that time.
You have no idea how much I wished to find others that were interested in such things when I was young. If I even mentioned such things, I was looked at like I was freak or something. That's one of the big reasons that I became
LoneWolf
SS,
I got that from a book in the library. I don't have its title/author just at this second to give you the reference.
A link posted by Seedy (the first one) shows a little info about how the god wrote directly on stone (just like YHWH)
Sirona
