Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Pyramids at Giza were there BEFORE the Egyptians got there.

page: 39
3
<< 36  37  38    40 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 5 2006 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by win 52
Just saying wrong or you are wacked, is not correct. I started by studying the bible to try and find truth. That study has brought me here with more questions than answers.

If you want me to believe some of the current thoughts about the whole Adam to me story, it is going to have to be a lot more cut and dried. That includes the part about Egypt and all that goes with it. Obviously, that part of the World has been the middle of Civilization, since the beginning of Human History.


Which was the entire point of reading through the Bible in the first place, to find more questions to answer. It's the goal of every human to find more truth. If we had no new questions to ask, what'd be the point in living? It's these questions that bring us here. Not the least of which is the part where Cain leaves the Garden, only to go to the Land of Nod, where he finds him a WIFE?? Where'd she come from, and how is it that we've not heard of this group of people as of yet? I know I've mentioned this before in here, but the very thought merits another run through.



You have voted win 52 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.


I thought you deserved one too. That's the kind of attitude we want to foster on here, not the secularized ones that can't take in new ideas. Good work.

TheBorg




posted on Dec, 6 2006 @ 02:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by win 52
The time lines that are used for the construction could easily be wrong, I believe them to be much older than the current thought is on that.

Not very likely. Somewhere around page 21 (with pics on page 31 that I had trouble posting along with page 21) is the accepted timeline for the building of the Giza Pyramids & the pertinent history that leads up to it.

Originally posted by win 52
I am waiding through the thread.

Maybe you haven't "waded" that far through the thread yet?


The evidence that's been dug up in & around Egypt for the past hundred years or so is actual, physical evidence that's been investigated by professional Egyptologists for the past hundred years or so: Posted on page 21 is the current knowledge based upon a whole plethora of scientific fields that specialize in Egypt (Hence, the field is called "Egyptology" even though it includes Anthropology, Archeology, Philology, Geology, etc. but as it pertains to the study of Egypt).


Originally posted by win 52
Could they have been refurbished by the people we now believe to have built them?

Refurbished? Not likely...All of the physical evidence collaborates with the idea that the Giza Pyramids were built by the sons of Snefru (4th Dynasty).


Originally posted by win 52
I started by studying the bible to try and find truth. That study has brought me here with more questions than answers.

Perhaps you might continue with the study of the history of the Bible itself...It's origins & those people who held the authority to reveal what it actually contains today. Perhaps a bit of study of the Dead Sea Scrolls might help...They contain what is thought to be the earliest known writings on the "new" religion of Christianity itself. To conduct a proper investigation of any information that you use, be also sure to check the background on your sources.


Originally posted by TheBorg
Not the least of which is the part where Cain leaves the Garden, only to go to the Land of Nod, where he finds him a WIFE?? Where'd she come from, and how is it that we've not heard of this group of people as of yet?

Yeah, that's something that's been nagging for years at the back of my skull too...


[edit on 6-12-2006 by MidnightDStroyer]



posted on Dec, 6 2006 @ 04:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightDStroyer

Originally posted by TheBorg
Not the least of which is the part where Cain leaves the Garden, only to go to the Land of Nod, where he finds him a WIFE?? Where'd she come from, and how is it that we've not heard of this group of people as of yet?

Yeah, that's something that's been nagging for years at the back of my skull too...


[edit on 6-12-2006 by MidnightDStroyer]


The only way that could possibly be is if there were other people here before Adam and Eve, which would mean that they weren't the first. Which brings up a whole host of other questions that I'm not even gonna ask right now because it would derail the heck out of this thread.

Suffice it to say that it's a mystery that only time can solve. I await the discovery of an ancient crashed craft here on Earth, where the original occupants crash-landed, and a few survived. Either that, or documentation linking our creation with any number of civilizations from the stars that "seeded" this little rock that we call Earth.

Just the ramblings of a madman though. Take them for what you will...

TheBorg



posted on Dec, 6 2006 @ 04:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheBorg
The only way that could possibly be is if there were other people here before Adam and Eve, which would mean that they weren't the first. Which brings up a whole host of other questions that I'm not even gonna ask right now because it would derail the heck out of this thread.


Not wishing to go too off topic, but doesn't Genesis say that God created man and then afterwards made Adam and Eve to live in Eden?


Although the fact it's an 8th century BC collation of various folk myths also allows for the strong possibility that a) it's not entirely a true story and b) bits were missed out (and, elsewhere, duplicated)



posted on Dec, 6 2006 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
Not wishing to go too off topic, but doesn't Genesis say that God created man and then afterwards made Adam and Eve to live in Eden?


Well technically we're not going off-topic, but I digress. As for your question, let's have a look.

Chapter 1's first mention of creation of man is in verse 26, in which is said:



26: And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth


*Note*: It needs to be said here that in Chapter 1, the order is different than in Chapter 2. God is said to create animals first, and then man "in his own image" in Chapter 1, while in Chapter 2, he creates Adam first, then creates animal companions for him before creating Eve. His creation is mentioned in Chapter 2, verses 7 and 8:



7: And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
8: And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.


Now I think that it should be pointed out that these two chapters seem to be telling the same story twice over. The first chapter seems to be a brief overview of the story, while the second chapter seems to be a more detailed version of the previous chapter.

I hope this puts things into perspective a little. I know it's confusing; it's even confusing for me, and I've been studying this very thing for several years. If ya got anymore questions, send em to me via U2U or make a new thread, and send me a U2U with the link. I'll post there. Would be better anyway, as more would profit from our conversation that way.

Best regards on your search for the truth,

TheBorg

P.S.

For legal reasons, I'm posting the site where I pulled these quotes from.

KJV Bible Online



posted on Dec, 6 2006 @ 12:23 PM
link   
In the catchpenny page under amusing diversions, the one titled Palin Papyrus. (new info.)

This is thought to be a play of one King covering up the name of another previous King's work. Kind of funny, don't you think? If they were making plays about it in 300 BC, it must have been a common, accepted practice in those days. All that is needed is a few cigars, some wine and we can all have a laugh.

There is one common theme that keeps draging me back to my road. That is the wickedness of humans, which is the one constant thing that we can be sure of. It has been said that if I can think about something, it has probably already been done many times, before.

With the time lines and all of that, one thing sticks out, do they all match up or are they all differen't? Does the Biblical ancestory match the Egyptian King time frame? I am not trying to put them together, I just would like to clear my mind about this issue....going to 21 today....If it comes down to who do I believe......I will say that I believe in God.....the Egyptians lied.....and that is why the judgements against them (which is what brought me here). ....I have also read Aaron Donahue's work (not sure what to make of that stuff yet). If you are going to say crap, keep it to yourself. If you can shed light and understanding, bring it.

The bit about where the other people came from......I am leaning towards people being around for a while before sin came into the picture....could be for a few thousand years. The Bible is the story of the origin of sin and how God's plan of redemption was brought about, but leaves quite a few questions about Creation and the time before sin. If you see it as the story of the Jews, you may need to step back a bit further and take another look. I believe it was meant for the humans of the world. Something happened between creation and the apple (which may have been the last straw). Eve brought sin to the human race???.... What ever the case, if I look at my family tree and try to figure out how many people have been borne in the past 200 years, if they lived for 900 years, having children all along, that would be quite a family picnic. We would need to rent the Superdome.

All stories and historical records are about us and where we came from. If you say this is wrong and that is right, you are only limiting your area of study and could cause you to think in error.



posted on Dec, 6 2006 @ 12:40 PM
link   
i can easily prove to you that large portions of the Bible are redacted versions of older stories from civilisations regarded as pagan by the same people claiming that the bible is the orginal word of god dictated to moses around 1500bce
I could do this very easily in a format that anyone can read and judge for themselves in less than a minute without any long winded explanations

it would of course totally destroy the idea that the bible is in any way a historical document
but heres the thing
would you be interested and if you ask me to post it will you actually read it with a scientific mind or the usual "I don't believe it my God is real and this must be the work of satan fundementalism"

because of you are interested I will post it
but if youre a fundie then I won't bother

choose



posted on Dec, 6 2006 @ 01:06 PM
link   
Win 52,

Don't fall for it. A moderator has already come in here and said that if the topic doesn't stay on the topic the thread was created for, he will lock the thread and even potentially ban the people who do it. Start a new thread and have Mardy go there instead. I think he's a hatchet man cause he says whatever he wants, no matter how offensive, goes off topic all the time, and is never banned or even told by a moderator to tone it down. This means his position is to drag people he doesn't agree with off the topic and get them to post equally degrading things about him so they get banned or warned or locked out. In fact, someone started a thread about him, and he even said he gets rid of people on the forum that he disagrees with by egging them on so they violate the TOS. In short, the man is a walking stick of dynamite. Go to new thread and heck I'll even help ya if I can.


[edit on 6-12-2006 by undo]



posted on Dec, 6 2006 @ 02:11 PM
link   
I wish I had your imagination
fyi the mod team didn't say anything about my actions when they were going to shut this thread down
they were going to do it because people kept going off topic claiming that the Egyptians were Chinese and fictional characters were Enmerkar
kapeesh



At this point I'd advice you to check the code of conduct which quite clearly states that people have to be warned a number of times before they are banned
so you're scaremongering tactics to stop me posting things that you can't refute that prove your theories totally erroneous won't work Beth
you don't learn much do you
you realise that your last post could be considered a personal attack and defamation of character as well don't you
that is against the code of conduct
are we learning yet ?



posted on Dec, 6 2006 @ 02:53 PM
link   
So what about those pyramids, eh?

I think they may be older than the mainstream suggests, but the thing that seems a curiosity is the dated ages of the goo used to put the thing together (or rather, the things in the goo, such as pieces of wood/charcoal and etc).


p.s. I apologize for explaining what you said about yourself. interesting. very very interesting.

[edit on 6-12-2006 by undo]



posted on Dec, 6 2006 @ 05:55 PM
link   
I am not a Church going type.

I am spiritual and since the vision I had (not sure if some of you people would understand and accept) 2 days in a row in a hospital bed after my stroke, I am searching. If the guy that was talking to me was sent by the God of Abraham, I have only started my work. If it was something else, I should check into a Psyche ward. He told me I would recover and 18 months later I am better than I was when I went in (not cloged arteries). Still some paralysis, but for the most part doing well.

I have heard of some of this about the Bible being copied from other beliefs and I have yet to look into it. I know there are a lot of Jews who believe Jesus was a fake and are still looking for the Saviour. I will reserve my final decision for later. If some one forces me into a specific stand on an issue like this at this time, I will stand with God the Father, King over Heaven and Earth. So far he and my parents are the only ones who stand with me.

The thing that keeps me going is so much of the accepted theory is only a certain group agreeing to agree. Well, I disagree with some of what they say. Reading the confusion only makes my resolve stronger.

If the people who lived 7-10,000 years ago were long lived and, heaven forbid, used 100% of their available brain cells, most of the things we are arguing about today would seem like a joke. The light bulb might come on, because just maybe it wasn't a light bulb.... (lotus blossom with a snake and all of that hog wash is not an acceptable theory to me)..... after all. Just the study of the timeline makes me believe that inferior Man with sin and living 60 - 80 years could not have come up with what is built in Giza. The graves, recent refurbishing, time lines of evidence found and all of that are probably right on the money. We could possibly accomplish it today, but as one construction type discussed earlier, it would be a major job by todays standards.

Marduk, I don't believe you will have to wait another 32 years to find out.

[edit on 6-12-2006 by win 52]



posted on Dec, 6 2006 @ 08:07 PM
link   


Marduk, I don't believe you will have to wait another 32 years to find out.

is that a death threat or a promise of salvation



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 03:07 AM
link   
Marduk,

I think that it could be equally possible that several different groups all have similar stories of events that occurred in the past. Wouldn't that also be a fair assessment of the numbers of texts that seem to be being presented?

TheBorg



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 03:48 AM
link   


I think that it could be equally possible that several different groups all have similar stories of events that occurred in the past. Wouldn't that also be a fair assessment of the numbers of texts that seem to be being presented?

not in the case of the Bible no
it clearly is derived from am mesopotamian source
even the Talmud's proper name is the Babylonian Talmud
and here for your delectation and appreciation is a line by line comparison of the flood story from the epic of Gilgamesh and the story of Noah
bear in mind that the Gilgamesh story predates the biblical one by at least 1800 years

Gilgamesh: -
When a seventh day arrived
I sent forth a dove and released it.
The dove went off, but came back to me;
no perch was visible so it circled back to me.

Genesis 7
8 And he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground. 9 But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him to the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth

Gilgamesh
I sent forth a raven and released it.
The raven went off, and saw the waters slither back.
It eats, it scratches, it bobs, but does not circle back to me.

Genesis 7
7 And he sent forth a raven, and it went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth

so are you seriously still trying to tell me that the Hebrew stories are originally Hebrew when at the time the Epic Of Gilgamesh was written Hebrews, the Hebrew language and Hebrewism didn't exist.

fyi the God that sent the flood according to the Akkadians was Enlil. whereas you know the flood god according to the Hebrews was YHWH.
so YHWH was Enlil and Enlil was the top god of a pantheon of deities
in other words their society wasn't monotheistic.
this might help explain to you the references in the bible to other gods which don't make any sense if the Bible is original but makes perfect sense when you know it isn't

you know Enlil right
heres a picture
.
hes sitting at the back of the boat letting his brother Enki do all the hard work
this is the only known picture of YWHW

could be twins couldn't they
in the akkadian flood story it is Enlil who sends the flood and Enki who warns Upnapishtim (proto Noah) that the flood is coming
in the bible it is YHWH who sends the flood and warns Noah that it is coming
so clearly its a redaction taking into account that monotheism allows no other gods
it gives all the roles in the story to YHWH.

Lewis Black who is a Hebrew scholar has his own reason for these differences
www.youtube.com...



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 04:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by win 52
With the time lines and all of that, one thing sticks out, do they all match up or are they all differen't? Does the Biblical ancestory match the Egyptian King time frame?

Hmmm...This may a bit off topic for discussing the Giza Pyramids, but I have found something that seems to match the Bible to Egyptian history. It concerns the timeline during the Exodus: Yes, that was well after the Giza Pyramids. The Bible is pretty notorious for not including any specific system of dating the events for which it speaks, but the evidence indicates that the Giza Pyramids were already ancient history by the time Moses grew up in Egypt.

Have you noticed how most of the "theatric" versions depicting Moses & the Exodus have been placed in the time of Ramses II (aka: Ramses the Great)? There are a few bits of historical precedents for doing so.
Primarily, some of the Armana Letters (unearthed in the 1880's), written by various princes to Pharoahs Amenhotep III & IV. Here I quote one letter in particular:
"The King's whole land, which has begun hostilities with me, will be lost. Behold the territory of Seir as far as Carmel: It's princes are wholly lost...Now the Habiri are occupying the King's cities...Let the King take care of his own land...And send troops...If no troops come within the year, the whole territory of my Lord the King will perish."
Bold emphasis is mine.
If this is talking about the same thing, then the Hebrew conquest happened about 1380-1360 B.C. or so, during the reign of Amenhotep IV. By the Bible accounts, Exodus with Moses happened about 40 years earlier...About 1420 B.C. or so.
At that time, Moses was living in Egypt, before he murdered a slave overseer & fled into the desert. Pharaoh at the time was Akhenaton (The Heretic Pharoah, who changed the whole face of Egyptian religion by worshipping Aton as the one god!
This also raises a whole slew of other questions as well:
Did Akhenaton influence Moses? Or vice versa?
Did they merely happen to "drink from the same well," as it were?
The Egyptian court at the time was crawling with foreigners & foreign ideas, maybe Nefertiti herself had some influence there?

At any rate, even though time has wiped out a lot of historical knowledge, there still are some connections left here & there...


[edit on 8-12-2006 by MidnightDStroyer]



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 05:07 AM
link   
the Hebrews claimed to have been in Egypt for 400 years as slaves
so timelines are important here.
they also claim to have built the city of On (Heliopolis) while they were there
this is quite frankly impossible bacause On was a predynastic city existing since before 3100bce
so the Exodus is fictional or the people who wrote it were greatly exaggerating on something that did happen
every time they rewrite it they edit it so that its more realistic
if it was true they wouldn't need to do that

people keep forgetting that the old testament is not a history book its a Hebrew cosmology derived from the mythology of the people areound them when they wrote it

if you accept that the Israelites were egyptian slaves you also have to accept that God created the Earth in seven days around 4004bce
you can't pick and choose with monotheistic religions
you can't claim "hey if we move the date a little or change some of the names then its right". People do that all the time with Platos Atlantis which is why its currently been found on every continent on earth and also in outer space somewhere
you have to draw the line somewhere

despite this millions of christians do choose to believe that they are the chosen people and will be saved when judgement day comes when in fact the bible clearly states that its the Jews who are the only ones who will be saved as they are the only chosen people

bit like putting all your money on black when the house has fixed the wheel to always come up red and you have been told its been fixed in advance of your bet
i.e. dumb dumb dumb



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Marduk....are you saying that we are the seed of satan and the Jews are the seed of Adam? It is common for most religeous groups to think that they are the only chosen ones.

I had a couple of links that will need to be found again. It was about other places in the world that have large construction sites. I feel they are linked to Egypt and the largest known Pyramid in the World (Bosnia).

The books of Enoch, not included in the Bible are a real eye opener.

Looking at the big picture...Borg... has the same thoughts that crossed my mind last evening, as I reflected on what I have read.

In 1 Enoch, it says the Pyramids and other large cities were built by people before Adam. That leads one to think that Adam was a result of that older, advanced culture.

It is not too hard to think this way. The Bible and I believe the other Ancient Historical Documents are there for us to figure out where we came from. If you keep this thought, you can easily accept that the big guy had a hand in all of the recording and preserving of that History. That opens salvation up to the decendents of Noah. All you need is to accept Jesus as your Saviour. It is just that simple......no pomp... no works. If you do things like keeping the Seventh Day holy, you do it out of respect and love.

I did get a laugh about the large wine goblet.



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 10:55 AM
link   
if youre going to start spouting a religious agenda then use the religious forum
this forum is for ancient civilisations
as the religion you are talking about didn't actually exist before 2500 years ago it hardly even qualifies as ancient. thats right
It didnt exist in ancient times.
the bible didnt exist and neither did the god that it talks about
this is an irrefutable fact
so get off your altar and accept it

I can see that you either
1. didn't read my last post
or
2. didn't understand it
or
3. refused to look at the evidence

probably a little of all three

your idea that the Bosnian pyramid is anything but a hill is also ludicrous
do a little research on the cons that Samir Osmaganic has pulled so far and be aware that as a committed (imo he should be committed) moslem he has already claimed that it was built by moslems several times
so any claim that you have for the seed of Noah being responsible is erroneous



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Noah......My claim is that the Pyramids are not a product of the seed from Noah.

As our true God has tried to tell us, over and over (all this has the same author, just differen't secretaries), but some of us are like Pharoah during the release of the Hebrews. They just dig in and won't accept salvation. That is why there will be so many lost souls. The author wants all souls to be saved, but the reality is that there will be many lost.

With the site being down, I didn't get to study the evidence yet. I still think there has been a lot of re-furbishing done in Egypt. They were still making jokes of this in 300 BC.

[edit on 8-12-2006 by win 52]

points for edits?..... Marduk, I suggest you step down from your podium.

[edit on 8-12-2006 by win 52]



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 12:16 PM
link   
I worship the great God Bel Marduk
seeing as he's at least 2000 years older than your god mine takes precendence
in fact
there are more ancient texts about my god than there are about yours
so by comparison your god is a little weak
My god saved humanity from the flood created mankind and all the animals and plants so the claim that you god did it is just a big fat lie
My god was alsoresponsible for creating the heavens and all the planest and the rest of the universe

anything you say from now on that contradicts my religous beliefs is heresy and therefore completely invalid


this is what you sound like
I just thought you might want to know that





new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 36  37  38    40 >>

log in

join