On Ancient Egypt's Influence on the Creation of the Kingdom of Israel and Monotheism.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Spider879

Does this mean it could also be possible that the early Hebrews renamed their religious figures to more glorify their actions in life? I mean if Abram means "father of the people", that is an AWFULLY convenient name to give your child who later grows up to be the father of three major religions after he dies (actually many more than that, but only three mater at this time).

That is entirely possible , the Greeks later did the same thing, sometimes causing confusion about their Gods origins.

a reply to: Spider879

Really? I wasn't aware of that. I would have thought the Romans had done it to the Greeks, but that goes to show how all religion comes from previous religions.

a reply to: crazyewok

That really sheds light on when people in modern times give someone a religious name. If you name your child Abraham, you could very well be misnaming the very patriarch you admire that founded your religions. Interesting...

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: crazyewok

Yea, they are probably the big two, but you can also see characteristics of other gods from later civilizations within god's "personality" so it's tough to say, but the Shasu calling their god YHW is CERTAINLY an intriguing detail.

I wonder if the OP is going to go into the influences of Zoroastrianism on Abrahamic faiths, or is he just sticking to the Egyptian region of the world?

According to the BBC Zoroastrianism sees its beginnings at then end of the Bronze Age.

An approximate date of 1200-1500 BCE has been established through archaeological evidence and linguistic comparisons with the Hindu text, the Rig Veda.

Link

Given that the founding of Zoroastrianism was around the same time as the removal of the cult of Aten in Egypt there could be a strong connection between the development of Judaism and Zoroastrianism.

Also, the Shasu were a nomadic group that were subdivided into different groups presumably based on the God they followed. One of the groups followed YWH which is generally taken to be Yahweh in some early from. If one of the other groups can be shown to follow a specific god that resembles Ahura Mazda there could perhaps be a case made.

Thanks for the great responses and helping to develop my theory more.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: crazyewok

That really sheds light on when people in modern times give someone a religious name. If you name your child Abraham, you could very well be misnaming the very patriarch you admire that founded your religions. Interesting...

For me it no different than a screen name. It may not be his personal name but its his name attached to his public persona.

originally posted by: hubrisinxs
Given that the founding of Zoroastrianism was around the same time as the removal of the cult of Aten in Egypt there could be a strong connection between the development of Judaism and Zoroastrianism.

Yea, I've noted this connection before in the past. There are many parts of Zoroastrianism that mirror Abrahamic dogma. The really big one being that there is an eternal struggle between good and evil that will ultimately result in a final battle where the world is destroyed and the devout and good go on to be with their god. Well actually, all people go on to be with god. It's just that your sins have to be "cleansed" off of you by bathing in fire first, and the more sins the more painful the cleansing process is supposed to be.

Also, the Shasu were a nomadic group that were subdivided into different groups presumably based on the God they followed. One of the groups followed YWH which is generally taken to be Yahweh in some early from. If one of the other groups can be shown to follow a specific god that resembles Ahura Mazda there could perhaps be a case made.

Thanks for the great responses and helping to develop my theory more.

Oh so they were a polytheistic group where one of their gods was YHW? Thanks for clearing that up. Do you think it is likely that they just repurposed the name or do you think the ancient Hebrews took many different characteristics from this particular god to describe their new god?

a reply to: crazyewok

But see, back in the ancient times names were thought to have a LOT of power. It was believed you could hold sway over demons just by knowing their true names. Religiously, misnaming someone you mean to name after a great historic figure would be kind of insulting. It's hard to conceptualize now because as with screennames, we can change our names today at the drop of a hat, but back in those times names were VERY significant.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Spider879

Really? I wasn't aware of that. I would have thought the Romans had done it to the Greeks, but that goes to show how all religion comes from previous religions.

Yes the Greeks merged their gods with those of Kmt, some even believed that the original Greek Gods and those of Kmt were the same.
The History of Herodotus

Almost all the names of the gods came into Greece from Egypt. My inquiries prove that they were all derived from a foreign source, and my opinion is that Egypt furnished the greater number. For with the exception of Neptune and the Dioscuri, whom I mentioned above, and Juno, Vesta, Themis, the Graces, and the Nereids, the other gods have been known from time immemorial in Egypt. This I assert on the authority of the Egyptians themselves. The gods, with whose names they profess themselves unacquainted, the Greeks received, I believe, from the Pelasgi, except Neptune. Of him they got their knowledge from the Libyans, by whom he has been always honoured, and who were anciently the only people that had a god of the name. The Egyptians differ from the Greeks also in paying no divine honours to heroes.
classics.mit.edu...

Off course modern scholars said that the Greeks simply wanted to tie themselves to a more ancient pedigree hence the actual merger that was to come after Herodotus time.

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Spider879

Does this mean it could also be possible that the early Hebrews renamed their religious figures to more glorify their actions in life? I mean if Abram means "father of the people", that is an AWFULLY convenient name to give your child who later grows up to be the father of three major religions after he dies (actually many more than that, but only three matter at this time).

Changing names certainly was not an unheard of even uncommon practice. Hell, it's done in the bible itself!

Abram name could very well have been Billy bob bob or Dwane, ok ok I joke, but you bring up a point.

Abram has his name changed by god in the bible to Abram-ham or "the father of the Hebrews"

Hebrews is the most common name before the founding of Israel, then it became Israelite, then after Roman destroyed everything and they moved to Europe and English was invented they became the Jews. So, what they called themselves changed even after the founding of their religion, so what's to say they did not change in the more formative years?

I don't think I go to far out on a limb to say that Tut-mose is transformed by linguistic processes into Moses.

Moses- "son of" Abram- "father of" Hebrews!

Thanks for all the great discussion. Wonderful ideas by all!

a reply to: Spider879

Man, I'm almost embarrassed to not know this. I was a real big fan of Greek mythology back when I was a kid. I used to easily recognize the obvious parallels between Greek and Roman gods, but I never stopped to consider where the Greek ones come from.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Oh, so they were a polytheistic group where one of their gods was YHW? Thanks for clearing that up. Do you think it is likely that they just repurposed the name or do you think the ancient Hebrews took many different characteristics from this particular god to describe their new god?

Shasu would be best seen as polytheistic or henotheistic with specific groups differentiated by the Egyptians are worshiping a specific god. I am on the side that Hebrews took the name YHW from the Shasu people, and it is the Shasu people that were what Moses's "father-in-law" represents. It is in his father-in-law's land he meets YHW and takes it back to Egypt. Father-in-law could symbolize that at one time they made a pact to attack Egypt for control of the upper Nile and trans-Jordan region, something Egyptian records seems to say happened a lot during the late bronze age.

Great questions, glad to see I have sparked so much interest in others.

a reply to: hubrisinxs

So could we potentially surmise that Moses combined his people with the Shasu to form the Hebrews?

PS: I love history, so if you present a topic that I'm interested about and also have it well research to boot, I'm likely to engage you in some way on it.

a reply to: hubrisinxs

I don't think I go to far out on a limb to say that Tut-mose is transformed by linguistic processes into Moses.

No limb to go out on, that is exactly what Moses is, a Nile Valley name , it meant something like child of the water, and given Kmt's connection to the river not surprising but the Biblical Moses himself could be seen as a child of the river given his story.

According to Dr. Ramses Seleem who wrote a new translation with commentary
of the "Egyptian Book of the Dead" 2001:-

Western Egyptology made the mistake of thinking ancient Egyptians worshipped many gods.
Animal and bird headed half human hybrids of the imagination
The mistake being in how the word god and goddess was interpreted

Of course most Westerner's use the word God to signify One God
Whereas to Ancient Egyptians it had a different meaning
...god / goddess represented natural laws
And also they did have an original Creator
Their beliefs being more a philosophy or way of understanding the Universe

Egypt as we know is very old civilisation lasting thousands of years
Over time their original ideas were taken up and turned to religious "Mumbo Jumbo" to fool the people

The original uncorrupted version or story of Creation speaks of Cosmic influences
When a soul has run the race of purity ... it is born as a body of light in Orion to serve The Creator

Belief in one Creator or one God/Goddess is probably older than recorded history if truth be known

Just to "Throw the cat amongst the pigeons"

Ahmed Osman wrote a book entitled
"Moses and Akhenaten / The secret history at the time of the Exodus

In it he claims and provides evidence to show Moses and Akhenaten were one and the same person

a reply to: artistpoet

Wow, really cool information! Thanks!

I have always thought of the Creator myth as a necessary central/first principle for the creation of a spiritual world-view. Religion and Spirituality were once one and the same. The collective psyche of humans perhaps fragmented it and keep parts secret. That knowledge transformed and changed over time becoming the religions we see today.

Also, I am going to have to look at that book by Ahmed Osman. Sounds like a great source for the argument I have been making.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: hubrisinxs

So could we potentially surmise that Moses combined his people with the Shasu to form the Hebrews?

I would assume the archeological evidence would support that, but digging in Saudia Arabia these days is kinda super restricted. So, probably won't get a chance to prove it anytime soon.

a reply to: hubrisinxs

Lol. Yeah, it may be just a TAD difficult.

originally posted by: Spider879
Below is a hand typed quote from a Dr Charles S Finch .

I'm sorry, that's nonsense, its another example of force to fit
Here is the actual origin of the name Adam
psd.museum.upenn.edu...
and here is the origin of the name of the Garden
psd.museum.upenn.edu...

This is so well known amongst Sumerologists and Biblical scholars that I am surprised to see a different etymology for it here, but then Dr Charles S Finch is a medical doctor, not an Egyptologist and not a linguist


Akkadian is an East Semitic language and dates to around 2500BCE developing out of Sumerian

Akkadian gradually replaced Sumerian as a spoken language around 2000 BC (the exact dating being a matter of debate),[5] but Sumerian continued to be used as a sacred, ceremonial, literary and scientific language in Mesopotamia until the 1st century AD

Hebrew is a Northwest Semitic language and dates to around 1000BBCE
So the languages are cousins, with Akkadian being far older than Hebrew

To ignore the fact that Genesis was written during or shortly after the diaspora would be a huge error,
en.wikipedia.org...
there is no supporting evidence for the Exodus, but there is an overwhelming amount of evidence that supports the writing of the first five books of the old testament as a response to the diaspora, while the Jews were slaves of the Babylonians

a reply to: Marduk

Again I could not cross check the kemetic etymology on the Hebrew names from Finch above, that said the languages of both are deeply rooted so that's what got my interest, however if you remember, Ehret had something along similar lines about the spread of the language and the seed of Semitic religions.
A Conversation with Christopher Ehret

Christopher Ehret, UCLA
Interviewed by WHC Co-editor Tom Laichas

WHC: You seem to be suggesting that the Semitic monotheism ­ Jewish, Christian and Islamic monotheism ­ descends from African models. Is that fair?

Ehret: Yeah, actually it is. Look at the first commandment: "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." It's not like the Muslim creed, which is "There is no God but God." It's doesn't say "there is no god but Yahweh, and Moses is his prophet." It is an admittance that there are other gods. It is an example of henotheism. And the Hebrew tribes are like the Omati clan groups. The tribes are clans writ larger. Like the Omati clans, they track their ancestry back ten or fifteen generations to a common ancestor. And these common ancestors were twelve brothers. (Actually, there are thirteen. They have to turn two of them, Ephraim and Manasseh, into half tribes, because thirteen wasn't a good number. I always loved that. There are really thirteen tribes, but you have to combine two of them)

The Canaanite cities have an alternative Semitic structure: polytheism. There's Astarte and Baal and the various gods that you'll find in South Arabia. So it looks like in the early Semitic world, you have two coexisting religions. You have polytheism among the ones who are really more urbanized. Then you have henotheistic groups.

What I see here is that earlier Middle Eastern polytheism is influencing Semitic religion. After all, the early Semites were just a few Africans arriving to find a lot of other people already in the area. So they're going to have to accommodate. Some groups, maybe ones who live in peripheries, in areas with lower population densities, may be able to impose the henotheistic religion they arrived with.

WHC: How does a small group of Semites coming in from Africa transform the language of a region in which they are a minority?

Ehret: One of the archaeological possibilities is a group called the Mushabaeans. This group moves in on another group that's Middle Eastern. Out of this, you get the Natufian people. Now, we can see in the archaeology that people were using wild grains the Middle East very early, back into the late glacial age, about 18,000 years ago. But they were just using these seeds as they were. At the same time, in this northeastern corner of Africa, another people ­ the Mushabaeans? ­ are using grindstones along the Nile, grinding the tubers of sedges. Somewhere along the way, they began to grind grain as well. Now, it's in the Mushabian period that grindstones come into the Middle East.

Conceivably, with a fuller utilization of grains, they're making bread. We can reconstruct a word for "flatbread," like Ethiopian injira. This is before proto-Semitic divided into Ethiopian and ancient Egyptian languages. So, maybe, the grindstone increases how fully you use the land. This is the kind of thing we need to see more evidence for.
worldhistoryconnected.press.illinois.edu...

As to the Exodus what I am saying is that remnants of the defeated Hyksos especially highborns and their household would have escaped northward from which they originated and a similar situation and outlet may have been the same for Aten priesthood who none looked on with favor after the death of Akhnaten I do not imagine millions of people pouring into the Levant in some epic march.