2 of 3
2
Moses identified as Crown Prince Tuthmosis
Posted: 09 September 2017 10:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3995
Joined  2009-10-21

welcome back Riann

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 September 2017 11:48 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  20
Joined  2017-09-03
DougC - 09 September 2017 09:01 AM

The Bible is a religious tract not a historical document, trying to “prove” any part of it is highly problematic. It was created for short term religious purposes not to accurately record events from that time.

Even the existence of someone much more prominent in the religious world like Jesus Christ is proving very difficult, the further back researchers go the less evidence there is he even existed.

So basically what we’re dealing with here is mythological figures that have been literalized for religious and political reasons.

Would you begin a search for the literal origins of Zeus or Odin, doing so with Moses is approaching that scale. Trying to turn the metaphorical into the literal produces meaningless results and anyone who understands what religion actual is understands it is almost entirely metaphorical in nature.

It would be an almighty big coincidence for all of the myths to independently tell the same story. The Megiddo ivory is very real and can’t be argued away. How would you interpret the scene on the ivory? Amenhotep III did spend a very long time in Nubia (why?) and probably died there. Your opinion that all biblical figures are mythological figures is just that - your opinion. And you’ll stick to that belief no matter what evidence to the contrary might surface.

As far as Jesus Christ is concerned, I am convinced that there are enough references to real people, like for instance Gaius Vibius Pansa, a Roman consul, to prove that a person that became known as Christ did exist. The Romans believed that Christ’s father was a Roman soldier called Pandira, and also that he was ‘of the Treasury’. In my book Barbelo I argue that Christ was born to Joseph, Herod’s treasurer, and Mariamne I, Herod’s second wife. Joseph was also known as the Old Man (Sabbas) and reference is made to a Joseph barsabas of the Flat Feet. Joseph, the son of (bar) the Old Man, of the Flat Feet. I could not find any information about the Flat Feet, until I read a bit about Cicero’s Pro Ligario speech, in which he defended a Roman soldier called Ligarius before Caesar. The Roman consul Gaius Vibius Pansa was also involved.

I had by then developed a habit of trying to translate, to satisfy my own curiosity, all interesting-looking Latin words I came across (I had Latin for 5 years at school and loved every bit of it). It turns out that Pansa means ‘having broad flat feet’, no less, and it is one of the tenses of pando, pandere. The word Ligarius has no direct translation, but again, by an almighty coincidence, the Latin word Lignarius means ‘a carpenter’. So, here we have in a single context the Flat Feet, a Roman soldier called Pandira (Pandere) and a carpenter (the NT relates that Joseph was a carpenter). Joseph and his friend Sohemus were supposed to guard Mariamne during Herod’s absence, but on on occasion he discovered that Joseph and Sohemus must have had intimate conversations with Mariamne, and had Sohemus promptly executed. It would seem that Joseph (sabas) ‘of the Flat Feet’ had some relationship with the Roman consul, perhaps having married his daughter, and Herod dared not touch him. As I point out in my book Barbelo, there are many stories about Christ and his disciples that point to conclusions that scholars simply seem to be unable to reach. For instance, the fact that the physical descriptions of Christ and Paul match to a T. And the sayings and deeds of Christ and Simon Magus are identical. Can’t they connect the dots?

It is the very controversy that this information seems to be pointing at, that convinces me that a person called Jesus Christ did exist, but that he was anything but the Son of God.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 September 2017 02:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  924
Joined  2016-01-24
Riaan - 09 September 2017 11:48 AM
DougC - 09 September 2017 09:01 AM

The Bible is a religious tract not a historical document, trying to “prove” any part of it is highly problematic. It was created for short term religious purposes not to accurately record events from that time.

Even the existence of someone much more prominent in the religious world like Jesus Christ is proving very difficult, the further back researchers go the less evidence there is he even existed.

So basically what we’re dealing with here is mythological figures that have been literalized for religious and political reasons.

Would you begin a search for the literal origins of Zeus or Odin, doing so with Moses is approaching that scale. Trying to turn the metaphorical into the literal produces meaningless results and anyone who understands what religion actual is understands it is almost entirely metaphorical in nature.

It would be an almighty big coincidence for all of the myths to independently tell the same story. The Megiddo ivory is very real and can’t be argued away. How would you interpret the scene on the ivory? Amenhotep III did spend a very long time in Nubia (why?) and probably died there. Your opinion that all biblical figures are mythological figures is just that - your opinion. And you’ll stick to that belief no matter what evidence to the contrary might surface.

I grew up a Christian and for a time I was a fundamentalist Christian which means I accepted the Bible literally. My tendency therefore would be to take what the Bible says literally, it is facts that now inform me of what is most likely. And that includes whether figures presented in what were intended from the start to be metaphorical texts actually existed. Are we going to look for Adam in the past or Noah or even Solomon. Just because someone is recorded to have been present in a religious context doesn’t mean they in fact had a physical presence on Earth.

As far as Jesus Christ is concerned, I am convinced that there are enough references to real people, like for instance Gaius Vibius Pansa, a Roman consul, to prove that a person that became known as Christ did exist. The Romans believed that Christ’s father was a Roman soldier called Pandira, and also that he was ‘of the Treasury’. In my book Barbelo I argue that Christ was born to Joseph, Herod’s treasurer, and Mariamne I, Herod’s second wife. Joseph was also known as the Old Man (Sabbas) and reference is made to a Joseph barsabas of the Flat Feet. Joseph, the son of (bar) the Old Man, of the Flat Feet. I could not find any information about the Flat Feet, until I read a bit about Cicero’s Pro Ligario speech, in which he defended a Roman soldier called Ligarius before Caesar. The Roman consul Gaius Vibius Pansa was also involved.

I’m not, shouldn’t it be obvious by now that the Christ figure is an amalgam of previous purely mythical figures from across the region including Egyptian going back thousands of years before the supposed time of Christ. These include Horus/Osiris, the Virgin Mary being based on Isis. The Osirian sacrament was virtually identical to the one catholics now practice but used ale instead of wine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJ5rnkrSzsQ

It’s been known since the Rosetta Stone allowed the translation of ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs that the Christ story was preceded by very similar mythical events that were understood to be exactly that… myth.

I had by then developed a habit of trying to translate, to satisfy my own curiosity, all interesting-looking Latin words I came across (I had Latin for 5 years at school and loved every bit of it). It turns out that Pansa means ‘having broad flat feet’, no less, and it is one of the tenses of pando, pandere. The word Ligarius has no direct translation, but again, by an almighty coincidence, the Latin word Lignarius means ‘a carpenter’. So, here we have in a single context the Flat Feet, a Roman soldier called Pandira (Pandere) and a carpenter (the NT relates that Joseph was a carpenter). Joseph and his friend Sohemus were supposed to guard Mariamne during Herod’s absence, but on on occasion he discovered that Joseph and Sohemus must have had intimate conversations with Mariamne, and had Sohemus promptly executed. It would seem that Joseph (sabas) ‘of the Flat Feet’ had some relationship with the Roman consul, perhaps having married his daughter, and Herod dared not touch him. As I point out in my book Barbelo, there are many stories about Christ and his disciples that point to conclusions that scholars simply seem to be unable to reach. For instance, the fact that the physical descriptions of Christ and Paul match to a T. And the sayings and deeds of Christ and Simon Magus are identical. Can’t they connect the dots?

It is the very controversy that this information seems to be pointing at, that convinces me that a person called Jesus Christ did exist, but that he was anything but the Son of God.

I’ve come to not see it that way, but instead see the nature of true Christianity to be of a purely spiritual nature, with Christ representing the logos or christos which is an internal presence or divinity that has nothing to do with actual historical events. Christianity took what was esoteric myths created to describe an inner reality that can not be explained in physical terms and tuned into a literal story that makes no sense at all in its present form. This was done to make it easy for more people to understand and follow which it did do, the cost being to lose most of the actual meaning of the faith. Which as I said is a description of an inner spirit or logos, not a man with miraculous powers.

The stories of Jesus healing by touch, raising the dead, converting water to wine, feeding the multitudes and rising from the dead are all based on metaphors that were created to describe the inner rising of conscience and personal inner growth and enlightenment, not literal physical events.

Moses takes this paradigm and extends it even further back in time with even less certainty of veracity.

Just look at current times where we record events and information to an extent never seen before… and we still have profound discussions over what is real right now. The issue of global warming being a prime example.

The Bible and all religious texts are not a historical record, they are a metaphorical representation of the best understanding of the inner life of people at the time. The concept of literal and accurate history that we have now didn’t even exist at the time and that includes the Egyptian culture which was highly influenced by myth and legend. So we must take all records from that time with skepticism.

Is it possible that there was a central figure who led what became the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt. Is the Bible figure of Moses and the book of Exodus an accurate reflection of actual events. Highly unlikely. It’s questionable that the Exodus even happened or that the Jews were ever slaves in Egypt.

Religion is myth and must been seen in this light to understand what it is actually saying. It is attempting to describe an inner reality or presence in our lives we do not have a direct connection to which is why these mythological figures are created in the first place… to indirectly describe this inner state. And that includes Moses I think the evidence indicates.

For me Christianity has a meaning now far greater than it did once you accept that Christ was never a physical man and the these supernatural events taking place in the Bible are not in a natural physical setting, they are meant to be seen in a purely metaphorical/spiritual light. That includes the “miracles” associated with Moses and the Exodus.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 September 2017 02:01 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  20
Joined  2017-09-03

For people who have supposedly never witnessed the aftereffects of a volcanic eruption, the ‘miracles’ of Moses describe in uncannily well. The walls of water would of course be a tsunami, in plague six Moses takes ash from a fireplace and blows it over Egypt, resulting in all kinds of diseases to break out. The darkness was, of course, caused by the volcanic ash blocking out the sun. Only the death of the firstborn was man made - the sacrifice, in fires, of the firstborn children of humans and animals, at precisely the same moment in time. Moses must have been rescued from the sacrificial fires in the nick of time, hence the ‘burning bush’ episode in the Bible.

It should be mentioned that the religious revolution of Egypt against the god Amun, in favour of Akhenaten’s god the Aten, is usually attributed to Akhenaten. A much more sensible explanation would be that Amenhotep III, on the advice of the High Priest of Amun, ordered the sacrifice of the firstborn. When they complied, but it did free Egypt from the deadly plague which was decimating the population, the rejected Amun straightaway. When the population realized that CP Tuthmosis, who would have been first in line to be sacrifice, they would really have been upset with the A3. In the end A3 decided not to fight his own son, with his rebel army, and retreated into Nubia.

How else would you explain the similarity between the plagues and the eruption of a volcano? The Koran even records a sonic boom and a ‘flood’.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 September 2017 07:53 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3995
Joined  2009-10-21

That’s an interesting theory that splitting the red sea could be a tsunami, but how do you explain the part where all those people walked right next to that wall of water? People that close to a tsunami usually die. And your burning bush explanation is effectively saying that the story is allegory. But, you don’t explain how you separate truth from allegory. Your explanations are “just so” stories.

Sorry, these posts are TLDR, so I’m not going to respond to all the random details. Are you familiar with Bayesian analysis? I have a rudimentary understanding of it, but it starts with something called a “prior probability”. Take Jesus. We have scripture that describes a man, born of a virgin as the son of God. We now have lots of other things written about him and claims of eye witnesses and a following that continues today. To determine if he is real, you start by looking at all the other scriptures about sons of gods, their supposed miracles and legacies. They all fair pretty poorly. People gave up supporting their beliefs in them. So, what is the probability that this one is true?

“It would be an almighty big coincidence for all of the myths to independently tell the same story.”
Actually, that’s why they are in the myth category. A myth is a story that gets passed around, adopted by other cultures, changed by each generation and claimed as a source when convenient. Your points of connection are interesting, but I don’t see them as evidence of events. I see them as evidence of cultures sharing ideas.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 September 2017 08:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  20
Joined  2017-09-03

Just a quick response to your first reply. A tsunami had definitely struck Egypt, but this had nothing to do with the path through the sea. The Red Sea is actually the Sea of Reeds, which is the Nile Delta. The Israelites as the Hyksos escaped from Avaris, some time after the tsunami had struck,  by marching day and night through the reeds, with only Thera’s plume (white by day, soft glow by night), determining their course. Once they reached the coast, they turned east and walked along the sand bars (up to 300m wide, if I recall correctly) which separate the waters of Lakes Manzala and Bardawil from the sea. Parts of this ‘path through the sea’ still exist today - could become a major tourist attraction.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 September 2017 08:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  924
Joined  2016-01-24
Riaan - 10 September 2017 02:01 AM

For people who have supposedly never witnessed the aftereffects of a volcanic eruption, the ‘miracles’ of Moses describe in uncannily well. The walls of water would of course be a tsunami, in plague six Moses takes ash from a fireplace and blows it over Egypt, resulting in all kinds of diseases to break out. The darkness was, of course, caused by the volcanic ash blocking out the sun. Only the death of the firstborn was man made - the sacrifice, in fires, of the firstborn children of humans and animals, at precisely the same moment in time. Moses must have been rescued from the sacrificial fires in the nick of time, hence the ‘burning bush’ episode in the Bible.

It should be mentioned that the religious revolution of Egypt against the god Amun, in favour of Akhenaten’s god the Aten, is usually attributed to Akhenaten. A much more sensible explanation would be that Amenhotep III, on the advice of the High Priest of Amun, ordered the sacrifice of the firstborn. When they complied, but it did free Egypt from the deadly plague which was decimating the population, the rejected Amun straightaway. When the population realized that CP Tuthmosis, who would have been first in line to be sacrifice, they would really have been upset with the A3. In the end A3 decided not to fight his own son, with his rebel army, and retreated into Nubia.

How else would you explain the similarity between the plagues and the eruption of a volcano? The Koran even records a sonic boom and a ‘flood’.

The likelihood of all these things happening together is very low.

What’s most likely going on here is the authors of these religious texts taking events that happened many years apart and plugging them into a narrative created for a specific purpose at that time. Let’s not forget the social and political role that religion still continuously plays that has very little to do with actual events.

In a sense Moses and the Exodus is the creation myth of the Jewish nation, there will be kernels of truth contained within but after several thousands of years it becomes almost impossible to find out what they are and at what point they actually took place. Just as it is almost impossible to determine which ancient massive flood in the region gave rise to the story of Noah’s flood. Was it the flooding of what is now the Black Sea which was almost certainly heavily populated in ancient times until the thin land bridge separating it from the Mediterranean gave way. Or was it the flooding of the Persian Gulf which underwent a similar flooding around that time as well.

It is safe to say that the Egyptian culture had a major influence on ancient Israel as it did on cultures throughout the region. I was probably the origin of much of what came to be religion and society throughout the ancient world and many bloodlines can likely be traced back to Egypt. So the idea of early leaders of Israel having Egyptian blood is quite possible.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 September 2017 08:42 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  20
Joined  2017-09-03
DougC - 10 September 2017 08:29 AM

The likelihood of all these things happening together is very low.

I have no idea why you would say that. In fact, the only way all these narratives can be linked together is if they all describe the same event.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 September 2017 09:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3995
Joined  2009-10-21

I can’t even reconcile two things you said just today. This

“For people who have supposedly never witnessed the after effects of a volcanic eruption, the ‘miracles’ of Moses describe in uncannily well. The walls of water would of course be a tsunami, in plague six Moses takes ash from a fireplace and blows it over Egypt, resulting in all kinds of diseases to break out.”

Then this

“Just a quick response to your first reply. A tsunami had definitely struck Egypt, but this had nothing to do with the path through the sea.”

So, what “wall of water” were you talking about in the first one?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 September 2017 10:53 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  20
Joined  2017-09-03

How would the ancient scribes have described a tsunami, other than ‘a wall of water’? I think you’ll get a better idea of what I mean here (Sections 20 and 21).

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 September 2017 10:53 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  924
Joined  2016-01-24
Riaan - 10 September 2017 08:42 AM
DougC - 10 September 2017 08:29 AM

The likelihood of all these things happening together is very low.

I have no idea why you would say that. In fact, the only way all these narratives can be linked together is if they all describe the same event.

I’m saying it because I’m looking at it from a viewpoint based on our best current understanding of how the natural world actually works, not how things are described in a religious text. As I’ve already stated I don’t think the purpose of religion is to describe in objective terms events and processes in the natural world. Religion is allegory and metaphor intended to describe an inner human reality not readily understood by any other means. This was the goal of early groups that gave rise to modern religions such as the Egyptian mystery cults.

They were an esoteric exploration of the inner nature of human consciousness and spirituality, not an exoteric examination of events, that is easily communicated to the masses but loses almost all meaning.

Modern religions take the figurative story of figures like Christ - who is clearly based on early mythical figures - and turns them into literal history with no foundation in literal fact.

Were there volcanic eruptions, plagues, massacres and more contained in books such as Exodus? Certainly.

Did they happen in the sequence contained in the Bible with the characters described. Almost certainly not, the Bible or any religious text is not a factual record of events. As I’ve already stated, the intent of religion is to build and maintain faith in followers, not accurately record facts.

[ Edited: 10 September 2017 03:42 PM by DougC ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 September 2017 11:49 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3995
Joined  2009-10-21
Riaan - 10 September 2017 10:53 AM

How would the ancient scribes have described a tsunami, other than ‘a wall of water’? I think you’ll get a better idea of what I mean here (Sections 20 and 21).

But then you switch to completely different explanation of parting the Red Sea. Thats what I’m asking about.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 September 2017 12:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  20
Joined  2017-09-03

The traditional belief is that for a path through the sea to have existed (which they remembered), there must have been walls of water on both sides. In practice there could never have been walls of water standing upright and frozen in time. I have nowhere advocated or supported this belief. As stated, the Koran specifically mentions a flood, but makes no mention of a path through the sea. I think we’re somehow talking past each other.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 September 2017 12:33 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3995
Joined  2009-10-21
Riaan - 10 September 2017 12:02 PM

The traditional belief is that for a path through the sea to have existed (which they remembered), there must have been walls of water on both sides. In practice there could never have been walls of water standing upright and frozen in time. I have nowhere advocated or supported this belief. As stated, the Koran specifically mentions a flood, but makes no mention of a path through the sea. I think we’re somehow talking past each other.

That is almost certain. Doug is doing a better job sorting you out.

Here you essentially admit the Bible story is a mix of observed nature and actual events. Elsewhere you stick to a more literal reporting of facts. So, I’m not following.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 September 2017 01:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  494
Joined  2011-09-13
Riaan - 09 September 2017 11:48 AM
DougC - 09 September 2017 09:01 AM

The Bible is a religious tract not a historical document, trying to “prove” any part of it is highly problematic. It was created for short term religious purposes not to accurately record events from that time.

Even the existence of someone much more prominent in the religious world like Jesus Christ is proving very difficult, the further back researchers go the less evidence there is he even existed.

So basically what we’re dealing with here is mythological figures that have been literalized for religious and political reasons.

Would you begin a search for the literal origins of Zeus or Odin, doing so with Moses is approaching that scale. Trying to turn the metaphorical into the literal produces meaningless results and anyone who understands what religion actual is understands it is almost entirely metaphorical in nature.

It would be an almighty big coincidence for all of the myths to independently tell the same story. The Megiddo ivory is very real and can’t be argued away. How would you interpret the scene on the ivory? Amenhotep III did spend a very long time in Nubia (why?) and probably died there. Your opinion that all biblical figures are mythological figures is just that - your opinion. And you’ll stick to that belief no matter what evidence to the contrary might surface.

As far as Jesus Christ is concerned, I am convinced that there are enough references to real people, like for instance Gaius Vibius Pansa, a Roman consul, to prove that a person that became known as Christ did exist. The Romans believed that Christ’s father was a Roman soldier called Pandira, and also that he was ‘of the Treasury’. In my book Barbelo I argue that Christ was born to Joseph, Herod’s treasurer, and Mariamne I, Herod’s second wife. Joseph was also known as the Old Man (Sabbas) and reference is made to a Joseph barsabas of the Flat Feet. Joseph, the son of (bar) the Old Man, of the Flat Feet. I could not find any information about the Flat Feet, until I read a bit about Cicero’s Pro Ligario speech, in which he defended a Roman soldier called Ligarius before Caesar. The Roman consul Gaius Vibius Pansa was also involved.

I had by then developed a habit of trying to translate, to satisfy my own curiosity, all interesting-looking Latin words I came across (I had Latin for 5 years at school and loved every bit of it). It turns out that Pansa means ‘having broad flat feet’, no less, and it is one of the tenses of pando, pandere. The word Ligarius has no direct translation, but again, by an almighty coincidence, the Latin word Lignarius means ‘a carpenter’. So, here we have in a single context the Flat Feet, a Roman soldier called Pandira (Pandere) and a carpenter (the NT relates that Joseph was a carpenter). Joseph and his friend Sohemus were supposed to guard Mariamne during Herod’s absence, but on on occasion he discovered that Joseph and Sohemus must have had intimate conversations with Mariamne, and had Sohemus promptly executed. It would seem that Joseph (sabas) ‘of the Flat Feet’ had some relationship with the Roman consul, perhaps having married his daughter, and Herod dared not touch him. As I point out in my book Barbelo, there are many stories about Christ and his disciples that point to conclusions that scholars simply seem to be unable to reach. For instance, the fact that the physical descriptions of Christ and Paul match to a T. And the sayings and deeds of Christ and Simon Magus are identical. Can’t they connect the dots?

It is the very controversy that this information seems to be pointing at, that convinces me that a person called Jesus Christ did exist, but that he was anything but the Son of God.

 

 

What is all this fuss?  Everyone today knows Charlton Heston was Moses.

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 3
2