“It be among the Jews…they change the words from their right times and places” Koran 5:45
To: Concerned Ministers
Subject: King Tutankhamen & Christianity
I believe in a Christ; I just don’t know what era he came from. I doubt Jesus lived during the time frame of Herod and Pontus Pilate. The Koran writes that errors were reported in the OT & NT. The Koran 19:28 states that Mary was the sister of Aaron. This can be interpreted as either being of a distant genealogical line or a contemporary with Aaron and Moses. You have stated in the past Mary had Egyptian genes. I never read in the Koran any historical figures in conjunction with a Jesus of Pilates time.
So do we have a Jesus of 33Ad or King Tutankhamen of 1324 Bc. One is a pseudo-lamb of 666 the other maybe a legitimate 777. All living Egyptian Kings embraced Horus while in office. Both Jesus and King Tut were admirers of Horus. Jesus reproduced Horus miracle of turning water into wine @ Cana a fictional city of Horus’s making grape-water @ a Canal. Both Jesus and King Tut were named after Amen. The Ram/lamb was also called Amen in Egypt. Revelations says 666 will be like a lamb. So I’m thinking they are talking about a Ram.
New studies of X-rays done on King Tut’s spine reveal he had a hunchback, with frail health and a fragile spinal cord. He must of lived in pain with his many walking sticks in his possession. Now they say Isaiah wrote in 700BC that “A man [Jesus] of suffering, accustomed to infirmity” Isaiah 53:3. Paul says Jesus was crucified in his Infirmity/weakness 2 Cor 13:4 ;9. JA Rogers wrote in the 1950’s a book called Nature Knows No Color Line. Rogers tracked down rare, suppressed writings from Josephus that said Jesus was hunchbacked. Now if you carefully read Isaiah they were talking about a man who already lived and died. When Moses wrote of King Tut/Jesus in Deuteronomy 18:19/ Exodus 20:7 he said he would die because he would call god by other names. This fits Tut’s name of Amen and name change to Aton. Moses wanted only Aton (Hear ,O Israel, the lord our God Aton is one Deut 6:4 Sigmund Freud said you can interchange Lord/Aton which makes logic out of Deut 18.). Jesus in the NT called out to Eli, (Elohim/Power of breath or gave up the ghost/wind) on his Cross, which was linked with Amen. Note at the Easter/Passover Jesus died and got his breath/life back. The Christian Easter is a mirror image of the Egyptian’s “Breath of life celebration. Jesus also linked himself with Jehovah which has the components of Aton which was Tut’s original name.
With King Tut (Jesus) being very ill he would have quite naturally sought after magic for cures. As a matter of fact the Talmud states “Phihas (Phinehas) hanged Jesus… because he hath practiced magic” (Sanh.,43a/106b). The reason the name Phinehas can be seen serving both Moses and Akhenaton’s administration is due to the fact the last two were one and the same. Now lets get back to magic. Magic was also apart of the anointing process of Egyptian Kings. The fat from crocodiles were used to anoint kings on their foreheads for them to have wisdom and forethought to lead their subjects. The image of two crocodiles were used at the kings coronation. The last zodiac sign in Egypt was a crocodile; and Rome changed it to two fishes/Pisces. Christianity became symbolic of the fish after it left Aries the Lamb. The word for Messiah was Crocodile in Egypt which I already stated was the process for installing kings. Now we know the anti-Christ is supposed to be a king and 666 will be on his forehead or hand. US presidents use the symbol of raising hand to be installed to taking power. Read the writings of Plutarch in Isis and Osiris which associates 666 with crocodiles, forethought and creation. Rev asks for insight & wisdom to figure out 666. The Catholic Bible has one of its chapters of Ezekiel as: “Egypt the crocodile” referring to their kings.
ALL THE COMPONENTS OF 666 Numbers are symbols.
7 is symbolic of Perfect/Complete 6 is symbolic of Imperfect/Incomplete
Go to the dictionary look up Hex=witch/magician then Hexad=a series of six’s.
Sir E.A. Wallis Budge wrote in The Gods of the Egyptians Volume 2, that Heka/magic was symbolic of a deformed, imperfectly created frog or man. Now king Tut having been born deformed with medical problems would here again be symbolically linked with Heka. Paul tells us Jesus was “made perfect” through his sufferings (Heb 5:9). This implies that he wasn’t born perfect and advances Isaiah 53, I’m understanding he had a life long illness. Matthew Henry’s Commentary gives this context to Hebrews 5 “We may have many recoveries from sickness, but we are never saved from death till we are carried well through it” (p.1915). Moses/Akhaton the reputed the father of Tut is said by Egyptologist to have had a back back also.
Now the Bible says that their can be many anti-Christ and false Messiahs that came in the past and in the future. Now all I’m saying is that the angel of light making many magical transformations and sorcery of tricks as said in the NT was based on King Tut who lived and died a very long time ago. No wonder Revelations say Christ was spiritually killed in Egypt. Now also note that the end of the world/age is the beginning of the zodiac sign of Aquarius which starts in 2012. There will be no lake of fires unless we keep up with the self-destruction onslaught of global warming.
Kin g Tut was associated with Thoth. The Koran calls Satan Iblis. An Egyptian who invented magic, numbers, and crafts was called Thoth. Thoth was pictured with the Ibis bird who feet could symbolically form the 6 pointed star of David/Pillars of Solomon. Revelation associated spiritual evil with a unnamed Bird. Do we have a link with Iblis & Ibis?. Revelation also claims that no craftsmen are needed in its new city. So we have 666 being linked with:
1.Frogs/ Heka being incompletely/imperfectly formed; gods of fertility. (6) 2.Crocodiles/ Messiah’s anointing Kings with a vision of wisdom 3.Birds/ Ibis bird and possibly Iblis from the Koran 4.Magicians/ False healing remedies 5.Craftmen/ Making images with their hands for worship 6.Lambs/ Shepherds aligned with Horus 7.Amen/ the spirit of blasphemy against the Holy spirit 8.Messiah in the image of two crocodiles or two Fish of Pisces 9.Angels of Light using transformational forms of magic like fire from the sky 10.Venus is the Bride clouded, veiled in sheep (ram) attire 11.Lucifer an anti-Christ with angels following his orders 12.Morning Star & Evening star Satan tries to become. 13.Upside down Pyramids & Upright Pyramids also being linked with the keys of Peter whose real name was based on the Egyptian God called Pet. 14. Words of Power another name for magic or peaking/Blasphemy against the holy spirit/Amen. Amen is linked with air/spirit. Not only speaking against spirit but comparing it to another spirit/amen. 15. A bronze snake wrapped around a pole/tree Thoth used for his magical powers for cures. Just think of Satan first appearing to Adam wrapped around a tree. Now I find it very interesting Jesus compares himself to the bronze snake in John 3:14-15.I see this not as a parable or reenactment of history but indeed a cryptic way of implicating Moses with Phinehas in his very own death (Num 21:9). The symbol of this serpent was probably is UAT'CHET (pronounced "OOH-WAH-JET" is a Goddess deity that represents divine insight, premonition, the power of discernment, etc. Incidentally, these are the same attributes needed to figure out what 666 is. First of all premonition/foretelling is a form of magic. “This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number…666” (Rev 13:18) This snake was placed at the forehead of Egyptian kings. 16. Magic is responsible for the world being deceived from God (Rev 18:23) 17. Tut’s crown was partly a form of magic.Paul speaks against crowns that are not eternal 1 Cor 9:25. Thoth also had the “crown of Shu”. Shu was a god of light/air. Shu was responsible for giving life (air) to the dead and living. Revelations 2:10 talks about crowns of life.
So the debate is on did Jesus operate some low-riding chariots with the 18th Egyptian dynasty with Moses or did Herod and Pilate hold court on him sometime after 30Ad? Zondervan Handbook of the Bible (p.573) says the killing of Jesus was an reenactment of OT Passover killings of Egyptians (Matthew 26). Therefore Jesus was Egyptian because he died. The Passover lamb blood on doors in OT and Jesus death in the NT drinking of his blood is no reenactment but two events happening in on time period. It was no reenactment they were telling the real story symbolically but eliminated the true time frame. It’s very interesting when the Bible stated that the messiah was an Egyptian pharaoh, and the lord was his executioner “The lord smote…the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne” Exodus 12:29. Therefore before a Pharaoh was killed at the Passover another Pharaoh was living without occupying his throne at the same time that is, (King Tut and Akhenaton. Like I said before all Egyptian kings were the personification of Horus with Jesus being no exemption. With Akhenaton actually being Moses writing the death warrant of Jesus/King Tut in Deuteronomy 18. Jesus did say OT figures out of him. Jesus died first then later Moses being killed by a new Pharaoh. Jews had nothing to do with killing Jesus or Moses, the country and people to blame was Egypt.
I’m convinced that 666 wasn’t talking about a future king who would be the Anti-Christ but King Tut who lived in died along time ago. Like the Koran said the gospels were corrupted and tampered with in its proper time and place. King Tut was hung on a tree (Acts 5:30)just like the fictional Jesus. Autopsy reports his head became dislocated as a possible result of him being hung. All of this was conspired by the OT priest Pinehas (a Nubian) and a grandson of Aaron who was in turn a sister of Mary who was the mother of Jesus. He (Jesus/King Tut) already had a frail/weak spinal cord being attached to his head. He probably was hit in head and knocked off a horse and then hung on a tree. Or being attacked first in a tent. Phinehas didn’t kill Zimri and another women editors switched them for Tut and and his wife..
There are too many similarities and coincidences not to dismiss the claims that the bible writers wanted to have leaders and cut them off their roots from the Egyptian theology, politics, law and culture. Revelations I believe knew some ancient oral traditions like Isaiah knew and guarded it secretly under cryptic, veiled terminology of a Lamb with two horns having 666. The original Messiah, Tut was turned into a imitator of Christ who committed blasphemy against God and his name (Exodus 20:7).
Footnotes:
Not only did Isaiah correctly report that Jesus had a infirmity but in Isaiah 7:14 he says Jesus name is Immanel which means “His Amen is God”. Matthew 1:23 incorrectly translated it “God with us”. Now the Catholics say that Isaiah in another verse called Jesus the God of Amen/Truth. Its not a coincidence that King Tut called himself Amen.
Phinehas was a zealot (Num 25:11), a term which is applied to militants who use weapons. Phinehas did kill with a spear (Num 25:8). Phinehas is linked with the honor of god and Atonement for Israel (Num 25:13). Out of all names to invent they used Atonement the root word for Aton which Moses said Jesus violated (Deut 6:4; Deut 18:20). Jesus violated by speaking of God in other names. This was the transitions and switching from Aton to Amen. Moustafa Gadalla in his books states that Atonement was changed for the killing of Jesus to a general day for repentance and making Amends for sins which is linked with the Passover in Egypt during the time of Moses (Exodus23:15, Deut 16).
Case Closed on this old murder case.
Posts: 10 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
PS Another confirmation that Jesus and King Tut were the same comes from the Talmud Sanhedrin 106B that reports: “Balaam/Jesus the lame was thirty years old when Phinehas the Robber killed him”. Lame means “physically disabled” which King Tut was. The Talmud corroborates the book of Isaiah which says Jesus was infirm.
Posts: 10 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting theories. Many of the biblical chracters probably did have an ancient Egyptian origin. Then again the story of a Christ like figure..i.e. Krishna in India,Horus and Osiris in Egypt,Tamuz in Mesopotamia,and Mithra in Persia probably means this was a universal concept. As early as the Middle Kingdom followers of Osiris were granted eternal life if they believed in him.
Some Christians might argue that such a figure like Jesus Christ[Yeshua Ben Yusef] existed quoting Josephus,Tactius,and Pliny the Elder which whom they claim all consider him a real historical figure. Perhaps he was a Jewish zelot that fought against the Romans. In the Qumron scrolls there is mention of a type of revolutionary figure that resembles this historical zelot and casts doubt upon the Christ of the gosepels.
Anyway, the theory with Tut-ankh-amun is interesting.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes there were many stories. Like all gossip and stories have a start. I believe the foundation of the myth, the central idea started in Egypt then spread and altered througout the world.
Posts: 10 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting theories but I very much doubt Yehoshua ben Nazareth and Pharaoh Tutankhamen, the boy King, are one and the same. The writers of the New testament would have had to write a completely fictionalized tail based on ancient myths and the people of the time would have had to have conveniently forgotten merely a few decades after his death that such a man didn't really exist.
There may be a plethora of similarities between different Messiah like figures but the concept of a Messiah was nothing new. There were many people claiming to be messiahs throughout Israelite history. I don't know if everything written about Jesus was true, that is a matter of faith but I do believe he lived in the time period scripture says he lived in. Scribes were very meticulous back then about historical accuracy.
Posts: 1203 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Side Thought--"The Africans Who Wrote the Bible" is a must read, by Dr. Nana Banchie Darkwah...
Posts: 8 | From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The only way Jesus's or Yeshua's identity could be understood is if scriptures in Aramaic can be found. The only NT sources are available in mainly Greek, and just a bit of Aramaic. Even though the Greek tongue was a vernacular in Anatolia and Eastern Rome, that was not the case in Israel or Palestine. Keep in mind, when Jesus was killed by the Romans, a "witch-hunt" was initiated in order to Christianity into a religion that could be used as a state religion by the Romans. Christianity could have been heavily alterred by the Romans or East Romans. That is why we see the differences between the Bible and the Qu'ran.
I have a feeling that there is phenotype angle regarding Jesus. What we do know is that the image of Jesus created in Europe was pretty much based on fiction. Jesus was long time gone, or probably in Moorish Europe. Whatever the case, since Jesus opposed idoltry, he will likely not want one to craft an image of him. The bibles does mention wooly hair and skin complexion akin to complexion, but if that's false, then we know that he was a dark skinned Middle Easterner.
Posts: 58 | From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Big_Kane: I have a feeling that there is phenotype angle regarding Jesus. What we do know is that the image of Jesus created in Europe was pretty much based on fiction. Jesus was long time gone, or probably in Moorish Europe. Whatever the case, since Jesus opposed idoltry, he will likely not want one to craft an image of him. The bibles does mention wooly hair and skin complexion akin to complexion, but if that's false, then we know that he was a dark skinned Middle Easterner.
I've read the passages in question that allegedly give detail about Jesus's physical appearance, personally I think they have been taken out of context, I wouldn't give them much credence.
In one passage of the New Testament the figure that is being described as having hair "White like wool" is some sort of a mythological being the author calls the "Ancient of Days", perhaps a physical manifestation of God. Then a figure "like" a Son of Man comes into the picture and is given authority by the "Ancient of Days". It seems that this figure is indeed Jesus Christ.
quote:Daniel 7:9-14
"As I looked, "thrones were set in place, and the Ancient of Days took his seat. His clothing was as white as snow; the hair of his head was white like wool. His throne was flaming with fire, and its wheels were all ablaze.
10 A river of fire was flowing, coming out from before him. Thousands upon thousands attended him; ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him. The court was seated, and the books were opened.
11 "Then I continued to watch because of the boastful words the horn was speaking. I kept looking until the beast was slain and its body destroyed and thrown into the blazing fire. 12 (The other beasts had been stripped of their authority, but were allowed to live for a period of time.)
13 "In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.
In another passage it would seem that the "Son of Man" is described in exactly the same fashion:
quote:Revelation 1:11-20
12I turned around to see the voice that was speaking to me. And when I turned I saw seven golden lampstands, 13and among the lampstands was someone "like a son of man," dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest. 14His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire. 15His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of rushing waters. 16In his right hand he held seven stars, and out of his mouth came a sharp double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.
17When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: "Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. 18I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.
19"Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later. 20The mystery of the seven stars that you saw in my right hand and of the seven golden lampstands is this: The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.
I've seen BBC's Jesus: The Complete Story, I think they overemphasize the part about hair being "White like Wool" as if the texture is also like wool, they also reject the idea that it is simply color merely because Jesus died at a young age and would likely not have White colored hair. Since this is someone's account from a dream it would also seem to be a matter of faith whether one believes it or not, to most people there is a big difference between an eyewitness account of an Earthly person and the account of a dream set on a spiritual plane.
So I personally am skeptical of that interpretation but did people in Jesus's time period and location have bronze skin and wooly hair? The program offered more insight into that question.
The Bible says that during the time period that Jesus was still a baby when Herod went around slaying children of his age,Mary and Joseph fled into Egypt. Scholars look at this claim as evidence that the Israelites couldn't have looked that different from the Egyptians if an Israelite family could flee to Egypt and blend end with the population. If they really stuck out like a sore thumb all Herod's men would have to do is slay the Israelite children in Egypt.
This is what many Lower Egyptians looked like in Roman times.
This image is a depiction of two brothers from a Fayoum mummy portrait.
Although not an image of Jesus, this forensic reconstruction of a 1st Century Jewish man was displayed on the program.
The skintone is completely subjective, it is based on the idea that the Israelites resembled the Egytians therefore it is an "Egyptian" skin tone (funny how this artist idea of an Egyptian skintone differs so much from the French team's that colored Tut the way they did).
The hair is based on images of Ancient Jews also during this time period who had short curly afros.
Before the trolls go on a tirade I am not saying the Israelites were Black though considering their hebrew ancestors spent hundreds of years in Egypt mixing with the locals I have no doubt that some of them did have observable traits consist with Black people. Some Palestinians and even Ashkenazi Jews still do today.
Posts: 1203 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I saw that programme and thought it was interesting! The pic of Jesus did appear lighter skin than the one you posted. They stated that the people in that location around that time did have "curly afros"(the actual phrase) and dark skin. However, I don't think that the depiction shows "curly afros". I don't trust the translation and the king james version of the bible. I would love to read the oldest documents of the bible to know the literal words and translation. Things are not always so clear cut especially when political, religious and economic hegemony are at stake! The truth or clarification is in the ancient text! Are they lost?
quote:Originally posted by Mansa Musa:
quote:Originally posted by Big_Kane: I have a feeling that there is phenotype angle regarding Jesus. What we do know is that the image of Jesus created in Europe was pretty much based on fiction. Jesus was long time gone, or probably in Moorish Europe. Whatever the case, since Jesus opposed idoltry, he will likely not want one to craft an image of him. The bibles does mention wooly hair and skin complexion akin to complexion, but if that's false, then we know that he was a dark skinned Middle Easterner.
I've read the passages in question that allegedly give detail about Jesus's physical appearance, personally I think they have been taken out of context, I wouldn't give them much credence.
In one passage of the New Testament the figure that is being described as having hair "White like wool" is some sort of a mythological being the author calls the "Ancient of Days", perhaps a physical manifestation of God. Then a figure "like" a Son of Man comes into the picture and is given authority by the "Ancient of Days". It seems that this figure is indeed Jesus Christ.
quote:Daniel 7:9-14
"As I looked, "thrones were set in place, and the Ancient of Days took his seat. His clothing was as white as snow; the hair of his head was white like wool. His throne was flaming with fire, and its wheels were all ablaze.
10 A river of fire was flowing, coming out from before him. Thousands upon thousands attended him; ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him. The court was seated, and the books were opened.
11 "Then I continued to watch because of the boastful words the horn was speaking. I kept looking until the beast was slain and its body destroyed and thrown into the blazing fire. 12 (The other beasts had been stripped of their authority, but were allowed to live for a period of time.)
13 "In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.
In another passage it would seem that the "Son of Man" is described in exactly the same fashion:
quote:Revelation 1:11-20
12I turned around to see the voice that was speaking to me. And when I turned I saw seven golden lampstands, 13and among the lampstands was someone "like a son of man," dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest. 14His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire. 15His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of rushing waters. 16In his right hand he held seven stars, and out of his mouth came a sharp double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.
17When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: "Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. 18I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.
19"Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later. 20The mystery of the seven stars that you saw in my right hand and of the seven golden lampstands is this: The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.
I've seen BBC's Jesus: The Complete Story, I think they overemphasize the part about hair being "White like Wool" as if the texture is also like wool, they also reject the idea that it is simply color merely because Jesus died at a young age and would likely not have White colored hair. Since this is someone's account from a dream it would also seem to be a matter of faith whether one believes it or not, to most people there is a big difference between an eyewitness account of an Earthly person and the account of a dream set on a spiritual plane.
So I personally am skeptical of that interpretation but did people in Jesus's time period and location have bronze skin and wooly hair? The program offered more insight into that question.
The Bible says that during the time period that Jesus was still a baby when Herod went around slaying children of his age,Mary and Joseph fled into Egypt. Scholars look at this claim as evidence that the Israelites couldn't have looked that different from the Egyptians if an Israelite family could flee to Egypt and blend end with the population. If they really stuck out like a sore thumb all Herod's men would have to do is slay the Israelite children in Egypt.
This is what many Lower Egyptians looked like in Roman times.
This image is a depiction of two brothers from a Fayoum mummy portrait.
Although not an image of Jesus, this forensic reconstruction of a 1st Century Jewish man was displayed on the program.
The skintone is completely subjective, it is based on the idea that the Israelites resembled the Egytians therefore it is an "Egyptian" skin tone (funny how this artist idea of an Egyptian skintone differs so much from the French team's that colored Tut the way they did).
The hair is based on images of Ancient Jews also during this time period who had short curly afros.
Before the trolls go on a tirade I am not saying the Israelites were Black though considering their hebrew ancestors spent hundreds of years in Egypt mixing with the locals I have no doubt that some of them did have observable traits consist with Black people. Some Palestinians and even Ashkenazi Jews still do today.
Posts: 318 | From: PA. USA | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Bible says that during the time period that Jesus was still a baby when Herod went around slaying children of his age,Mary and Joseph fled into Egypt. Scholars look at this claim as evidence that the Israelites couldn't have looked that different from the Egyptians if an Israelite family could flee to Egypt and blend end with the population. If they really stuck out like a sore thumb all Herod's men would have to do is slay the Israelite children in Egypt
The reason why Yeshua Ben Yusef's family fled into Egypt was because at this period there were large populations of Jews across both Lower and Middle Egypt. Most likely the local Jewish families would have given him refuge.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thot I have to disagree with you and say Jesus in actuality was a real historical figure who was deeply entrenched in His non traditional interpretation of Judaism. But make no mistake about Him, Jesus was thoroughly Jewish.
To be skeptical about Jesus's time and place merely because the Koran questions it as such is to wholly ignore all the historical evidences that Jesus did exist in Palestine in the first century. This is based on the pressuposition that the koran is inerrant, hence all things must be decided in light of it. I think many would disagree with that statement.
As for Jesus being an admirer of Horus, this is grossly false. The Jews were very selfish about their religion and their body politic as special people, and consider any other nation, religion etc to be inferior albeit abominations. Even the Romans found out how zealous the Jews were during the revold of A.D66-70. Josephus provides an acute glimpse of Jewish life in the first century. There were two major sects of Jews competing for influence amongst the people. These were the Pharisees who were ultra religious and the Sadducces who were liberal, and any examination of the doctrines of these two sects shows that they held any and everything that was not of Judaism in contempt.
Concerning the crucifixion of Jesus, and how it relates to the Passover specifically the killing of the Egyptians first born, is specious at best, since the crucifixion of Jesus, and the Passover Lamb, and the first born being killed all finds significance prior to the Passover. This is due to the fact that Abraham was supposed to kill Isaac the first born of him and his wife. We also have Esau being rejected and his brother Jacob benefitting in his place. Concerning the sacrificing of lambs, all this was done during the PreEgyptian stage of the Bible concerning the Exodus. What this signifies most preeminently is that for others to be free someone has to be sacrificed. All the blood atonement, animal sacrifices all point to this, and it is ultimately embodied in a human actually deferring himself for the benefits of others. This then finds its climax with the Messiah as shown in Isaiah, where the Messiah is likewise sacrificed.
Posts: 134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Bible says that during the time period that Jesus was still a baby when Herod went around slaying children of his age,Mary and Joseph fled into Egypt. Scholars look at this claim as evidence that the Israelites couldn't have looked that different from the Egyptians if an Israelite family could flee to Egypt and blend end with the population. If they really stuck out like a sore thumb all Herod's men would have to do is slay the Israelite children in Egypt
The reason why Yeshua Ben Yusef's family fled into Egypt was because at this period there were large populations of Jews across both Lower and Middle Egypt. Most likely the local Jewish families would have given him refuge.
I'm aware of that but like I said despite the large number of Jewish communities all Herod's men would have to do is attack these communities if they stuck out like a sore thumb. It certainly isn't the best explanation as many Egyptians at this point in time were likely light-skinned do to Greco-Roman settlements.
Posts: 1203 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansa Musa: I'm aware of that but like I said despite the large number of Jewish communities all Herod's men would have to do is attack these communities if they stuck out like a sore thumb...
But Herod would have to contend with the authorities of Egypt! I don't think the Roman governorate would allow it.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Son of Man and the Son of God mean two different things dears. There were many sons of God at the time of the supposed Jesus, and there were many Jesus'. It was a very common name then.
"Christ" means "Messiah". Messiah means "anointed one" There were many Messiahs in history. In fact all the Egyptian pharaohs could be said to be Messiahs, since the practise of anointing Pharaohs began with the anointing at the time of Sobeknefru, one of the earliest queens. The Messiahs would be anointed with the fat or oil of the Crocodile (Sobek) and the crocodile was a Mesher. That's why some people think that Tutankhamun was a "Christ", but the title could be given to any pharaoh or any anointed king.
The practise was also one of the Hebrews who probably followed the Egyptian - or maybe it was a Sumaic custom originally - and they anointed David as their King. All those from the royal line of David would have been Messiahs, or anointed ones.
The throne of Tutankhamun shows his wife Anksenemen "anointing' Tut with "perfume". I doubt if it were perfum myself, but could well have been crocodile oil, since it was on the occasion of his coronation. In the Bible "Christ" was anointed by Mary Magdalene - again the use of the word 'perfume' prevails, but it was most likely oil, as is used in all 'anointing'.
There is not one single word anywhere in history that truthfully records the life, death, or existance of any person called Jesus Christ. He exists only as part of the mind of a believer, outside of which there is no such person. As for being the literal Son of God who was sent to earth to be tortured and crucified, the idea is totally absurd.
666 is associated with the "Beast". The "beast" is a nickname for a learned teacher of the Wisdom Mysteries, and was later introduced into Herodian monasteries as part of the grading structure. Anything else is the subject of horror films, and Miltonian fantasy.
Jesus is equated with Moses because in the story of Moses being placed in a basket and abandoned to the Nile, this was in order that he would assimilate the knowledge (represented by the Nile) into the Ark (his human receptacle) and assimilate it and pass it to his soul. When the pharaoh ordered the killing of all the children it was so that all the souls of all the perfect ones of Israel would become part of Moses. In other words Israel WAS Moses and not merely the representative of Israel. In the same way the story of Jesus, has Herod killing all the small children so that all the souls of the innocents would assimiliate into the body of Jesus so that He - As the Human Race - in One Man could be crucified for the sins of us all. The story of Christ is all allegory from beginning to end. There is no actual history involved, but parts taken from all the Mystery Religions that abounded at the time.
Do let me know, dears, if you are interested in any of the points raised on this board, as I can give you the truth with regard to all of them.
Posts: 304 | From: egypt | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mrs. Doubtfire: There is not one single word anywhere in history that truthfully records the life, death, or existance of any person called Jesus Christ. He exists only as part of the mind of a believer, outside of which there is no such person. As for being the literal Son of God who was sent to earth to be tortured and crucified, the idea is totally absurd.
This is a very sensitive issue that millions of people would have a problem with.
Ultimately I think the metaphysical aspects of Christ's life such as raising from the dead, being divine and what not are a matter of faith.
However the claim that the New Testament is not based on a real historical figure altogether is not one to be taken lightly.
Symbolic similarities aside what do you have to say to the claims of those that look for historical evidence of Jesus?
posted
Good morning, my dears. It is most unfortunate that I have to say that anyone looking for a real historical Jesus Christ is wasting their time entirely. However, if they are looking for Faith and a belief that exists within the conjecture of their own minds, then that is perhaps a different story .
I have read through the links and in my opinion this is simply church propoganda engendered by church propagandists in order to try and prove the impossible. There are far too many things to discuss in one simple session and so perhaps I could suggest that if there is any one or two points you would like clarification on, then I would be happy to supply the details.
None of the links provide any proof whatsoever, and indeed some of it is even grossly inaccurate. For example Josephus Flavius was a Jewish traitor, who at the age of about 25 went to Rome and worked for at least two emporors, including Vespanius and some of the Roman gentry. He was not a Christian, he hated the Christians, and he thought the only son of God was Vespian. He certainly did not lead the Jewish Revolt against the Romans, it was the other way around and he was run out of Palestine. He never had one word to say about Jesus Christ, and nor indeed would he have in his position.
So, my dears, I am sorry to have to say this, but maybe you would like to bring in a specific point or two and we can discuss them.
Posts: 304 | From: egypt | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The issue can be raised from many angles including the fact that paganistic traditions that have a crucified savior concept can be used to validate the existence of a Christian messiah. The following was thrown back at me when I challenged a Christian to refute the crucified saviors in other traditions. Most likely the figure of Jesus Christ[Yeshua Ben Yusef] probably existed as a real figure but the ultimate question is wheather he was what Paulos said he was. Most historians will tell you he was a Jewish Zealot that fought against the Roman occupation of Judea.
The many modifications of Christ also came from many schisms in the early Christian church. Such as the Council of Nicea and Chalcedon.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you Auser, you make a couple of valid points. However, if - as some historians say - Jesus was a Zealot, there where is the proof of that. The Romans kept very careful records, and there is no mention of anyone named Jesus Christ by any of the writers of the day.. Only about 2OO years later is any "mention" made of any Jesus or Christ in the writings of Pliny, Suetonius and Tacitus and they were unaware of any historical Jesus per se.
The following is a list of all the major writers in Rome at the time of Jesus: Arrian, Plutarch, Silius Italicus, Aulus Gellius, Apollonius, Petronius, Seneca, Pausanias, Statius, Martrial, Damis, valerius Maximus, Lysias, Lucanus, Theon of Smyrna, Juvenal, favorinus, Hermogeones,Dion Pruseus, valerius Faccus, Columella, Pliny the Elder, Florus Lucius, Ptolemy, Appian, Quintilian Dio Chrysostom.
Not a single mention is made of any Jesus Christ.
I would like to quote for our readers a statement written by Albert schweitzer on the question of an historical Jesus.
"There is nothing more negative than the result of the critical study of the life of Jesus. The Jesus of Nazareth who came forward publicaly as the Messiah, who preached the ethic of the Kingdom of God, who founded the Kingdom of Heaven upon earth, and died to give his work its final consecration never had any existence. This image has not been destroyed from without, it has fallen to pieces, cleft and disintegrated by the concrete historical problems which came to the surface one after another." Posts: 304 | From: egypt | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mrs. Doubtfire: The Romans kept very careful records, and there is no mention of anyone named Jesus Christ by any of the writers of the day
As I'm sure you are aware Jesus Christ is not the real name of the alleged person, Yehoshua or Yeshua for short is the proper hebrew name. I have heard that around 10% of the Israelite population at the time had this name.
I think this discussion is a bit complicated for this little thread in EgyptSearch as far as I have researched into the subject it is well accepted by most historical scholars that Pontius Pilate was a real political figure and a figure equivalent to Jesus Christ was indeed recorded as being crucified under his jurisdiction. None of us really know because none of us were there.
I don't myself care to enter into a long winded discussion over it but if you can point me to some reliable links against the existence of a historical Jesus I will cross reference it with those in favor and see for myself which one is more accurate.
Posts: 1203 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Actually if you read a portion of the Dead Sea scrolls there is a person that fits the description of a Yeshua Ben Yusef revolutionary zealot. Some scholars might argue that Greco-Roman authors like Piny the Elder and Tactius mention reveal a figure like Yeshua Ben Yusef followed by many people that would later become Christians.
One error in the gosepels is that the crucifixion was not for regular criminals but people who revolted against the Roman empire. Meaning that the story of the crucifixion might not be as historically accurate as mentioned.
The Babylonian Talmud dismisses a figure like Christ that is branded as a bastard child and magician that learned from the Egyptians. A similiar reference is made by the philosopher Celus .
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeshua ben Yusef, which interpreted is 'Joshua son of Joseph' may indeed have been a revolutionary zealot, but this has no connection with Jesus the Christ or annointed descendent of King David.
As to the crucifixion, early "Christians" called "Romans" like Paul for example, did not believe that Jesus literally died a martyr, but that his death represented a symbolic mystical truth whereby one died to one's own lower self and resurrected as the "Christ" within. There is no record of any trial held by Pontius Pilate with regard to any Jesus Christ. The entire story is an allegorical fiction.
As to the 'name' of Jesus, there have been many names, at his birth he was "Emmanuel". He was also known as Icthys, which for hundreds of years was the Greek name for Adonis - the Jesus equivalent in the Syrian Mysteries. Jesus was also known as Adonis, although the Greek interpretation was corrupted to Adonai meaning simply "Lord". Tertullian, the great Christian mouthpiece even wrote:
"But we, the Christians, are little fishes after the type of our great Fish Icthys - Jesus Christ -, born in the water" This, apart from anything else, is why Christians were 'fishermen' or fishers of men. A pagan concept from the Pagan Mysteries.
Jesus was also known as Ieou, which you will notice are all Greek Vowels. Even the Christian scholars admit that the name of "Jesus" was forged on the back of Gematria some considerable time after his supposed existance.
Even the gospels do not agree, despite the claims by Christians that this was written by the hand of God, on such topics like his birth, his death, his crucifixion and even the events that took place in his assumed life.
Mrs. Doubtfire is not likely to accept that there is a historical Jesus Christ, and would ask for proof, although she knows that this is not possible. Posts: 304 | From: egypt | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
And here is another name of Jesus as promised: Iesous.
This is the name that Jesus may have been called originally. Some say it was Joshua, but how exactly the Hebrew Joshua becomes Jesus is a mystery. One can see how Yahweh became Joshua, and that is not a problem.
Even literalist Christian scholars acknowledge that the name of Jesus was originally Iesous, and was based upon the 24 letters of the Greek alphabet. Some letters in the Greek alphabet are given a numerical number, which I list below:
I = lO E = 8 S =2OO O = 7O U =4OO S =2OO
If these numbers are added together, the sum is 888. The gospel writers had mader an artificial and forced transliteration of the Hebrew name Joshua in order that it would express this symbolically significant number.
Just in case you think I have made it up, I would refer you to a statement made by Irenaeus one of the early church Fathers who wrote the massive work "against heresies" some time around 180 AD:
"Iesous is a name arithmetically symbolical, consisting of 6 letters, as is known by all those that belong to the called."
Of course, the name today has been changed again by removing the "O" and changing the "I" to a "J". This was done presumably to remove the "arithmetically symbolic" and pagan content of the name to something more acceptable in later times.
Therefore, whilst people are looking for the name of "Jesus" in the time of Pontius Pilate, not only are references to such a one forgeries, he most probably was not even called "Jesus" at all. Up to the time of Irenaeus who died in about 2OO AD, he was known as Iesous or Number 888 after the 24 characters of the Greek Alphabet. Pontinius Pilate could not therefore have come into contact with "Jesus" of the gospels unless he was alive 2OO years after the event. hahaha
Posts: 304 | From: egypt | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic