It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Moses was a Pharaoh

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2009 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Tesla401
 


Well basically it adds to my theory that we are co-creators and the messiah is a work of fantasy. In order too defeat this, we must acknowledge that we are all one. When so many people do not believe to what all signs seem to point out is lie. Then we need not take up arms against them. By not believing the religious institutions and governments will fall on their own.

Heres a time line I worked out during my research on Caesarion. The key is basically that 46 AD was around the same time as 1 AD. Julius Caesar established the twelve month Julian calendar in 46 AD. Caesarion was one year old at the time. Is it no coincidence that Jesus was about one year old around 1 AD? This transition goes on through 13 BC which would by my key 33 AD, the year Jesus was crucified and the Holy Roman Empire officially raised to power.

13 and 33, the underlying occult meaning.





posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 08:18 AM
link   
I do feel that the OT is a reflection of a rebellion against Egypt, in which we see a group who thinks they are being brought by God out of Egypt, or the other way around, they thought they were bringing God out of Egypt.

I dont think the LAWS began in the OT. Laws or moral standards were being established in those lands but a certain group claimed the LAW as giving to them by God.

I think circumcision began in Egypt, the importance of a first born son began in Egypt, the divine births began in Egypt, the idea of carrying a god into war began in Egypt, and the importance of a certain bloodline began in Egypt.

I think if God really did dwell once with Egypt, the people quickly distorted what God was and the distortion continued with the name of Yahweh. I believe this bloodline finally brought a man named Jesus who reestablished the divine nature of God and how the people can strive to allow the divine nature to shine through them onto others. I believe the NT also has distortion because the people wanted to tie Jesus to the God of the OT....but his teachings dont seem to fit that idea very well.

I think many times over we see the Hebrews having a connection with the Egyptians and being highly respected there. Mabey its because they were carrying a somewhat of a Egyptian bloodline. Mabey being from the line of David was being from the Egyptian bloodline. If Jesus knew he was of this bloodline, mabey he would of learned from the Egyptians, learning about the death of the body and resurrection of the body. Mabey there is lost knowledge that none of this stuff will make any sense until this knowledge is uncovered.

My mother (Grandma at ATS), a christian, had a NDE last yr. She saw many things, including Jesus, angels, figures that would of been from the bloodline of Moses, and she went below the sphinx and said that Ra was God. Now mabey she was just seeing what the Egyptians thought God to be, and to them, Ra was God. But I always found this odd. And because of her experience, I am much more open now to connect Egypt and the biblical stories together.

I also think that the stories of Isaac are related to Egypt, and I think mabey we need to be looking into the female bloodlines and not just the male bloodlines. I think this was something the OT wanted to change, the females in Egypt were held high because they were carriers of the 'gods'. We see this happen again with Mary. The orthodox religions did not like this, and did their best to make sure the masculine gender was kept higher then the female....instead of equal. ALot of ancient beliefs had LAWS and blood sacrifices.

Just some thoughts,
LV



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Allow me to ask a very stupid question.

The idea actually came from an Anne Rice book.

But would it be scientifically possible to get DNA from some of the mummies and clone or revive them?



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by LeoVirgo
 


Hello there:

Good post sweetheart. I must say you have given me a lot to ponder on. What you say does make a lot of sense. One really does have to consider all these questions, if one really wants to find the true knowledge.


Love ya

Mom



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tesla401
Abraham...was the Egyptian Pharaoh Amenemhet I


So you're trying to say that he was born in Thebes (not Ur in Chaldea as the Bible says... both cities are of similar ages so we know they are not the same) and that he moved the capital of Ur (somehow) to Ijtawy (a different large city) and did not travel to Canaan but stayed in Egypt creating pyramids and temples with his name on them and that Issac is somehow Senwoseret and instead of being nearly sacrificed is instead made co-ruler and goes off to lead campaigns against the Lybians and that both were known as living gods and that his "Instructions to his son" (which survives in hieroglyphic form) somehow neglected to mention that there was only one god instead of multiple ones and that Abraham somehow allowed other people to worship him as god and his son as god and that Abraham was murdered by members of his royal guard?

Really?

(Amenemhat - en.wikipedia.org... Abraham - en.wikipedia.org... )


Jacob...was the Israeli/Hyksos conqueror who sat on Egypts throne, ruling as Yakubher.

So in other words, he wasn't the grandson of Abraham and didn't found the 12 tribes of Israel but was instead a foreign ruler born 300 years or so after Amenemhat and that he preferred to be addressed as the god Meruserre rather than Jacob? And that he apparently didn't have any children that survive his reign?

en.wikipedia.org...



Moses...the Egyptian Pharaoh Thutmose III (note: Isis, mother of Moses)

And that Moses and his aunt co-ruled the Egyptians rather than the Hebrews, did not wander in the desert but rather stayed and conquered lots of territory (and the Hebrews forgot to mention that Moses was a warrior king who expanded their territory) and that Moses built over 50 temples to a number of gods (none of whom were Jehovah) and somehow forgot to inscribe the 10 commandments (given by Jehovah personally) on any of his 50 monuments (including the huge temple complex at Karnak, one of the seven wonders of Ancient Egypt) or multiple palace walls or even in the place he was buried?

Really?

That he didn't bother with even ONE commandment of the bunch he'd been given to enforce by Jehovah? Ever?

en.wikipedia.org...


King David...Pharaoh Psusennes I (David's son Solomon....sol means son and Omon means Ra.....was the same person as Siamun (son of Pharaoh Psusennes), meaning Son of Amun)


..so... although the Hebrew name "ben" means "son of", they used a word that didn't exist in Egyptian to mean "son of" instead of "geb", the word they have been using to designate "son of" on all their monuments and in all the names of the pharaohs for over a thousand years? www.uponreflection.co.uk...

Really?

And that David, Solomon's father, didn't rule very long and actually went around pardoning Egyptian priests rather than enforcing the rules and laws of the God of Israel and writing books and hymns about said deity?
en.wikipedia.org...


Really?


King Solomon...ruled as Pharaoh Siamun. (note: King Solomons Temple means "Temple of the Sun God Amen)


So the Bible got the lineages wrong and Solomon isn't David's son?
en.wikipedia.org...

Really?


Jesus...rightful heir to the throne of Egypt....son of Cleopatra and Julius Caesar...named Caesarion.

So the story of Mary being a virgin is wrong?

You're saying that the Virgin Mary is actually a famous ruler who was worshipped as the goddess Isis-Aphrodite, and that the Apostles didn't know the difference between a co-Pharaoh and a child of a carpenter from Bethlehem and that Jesus was actually not Jewish but Greek and that his lineage is not of the house of David but rather one of the generals of Alexander the Great?

And that Mary's father was heavily in debt to Rome which is why Caesar went to Egypt (which the Apostles somehow confused with Galilee where they lived)?

And that the Virgin Mary had several sisters and brothers that she led military campaigns against (which the Apostles somehow never found out about) and Mary had her sisters murdered and threw lavish banquets for her guests because of her vast wealth inherited from her father -- and the apostles and early Church Fathers somehow managed to overlook that Jesus had inherited a great portion of the wealth of the ancient world? They seemed pretty sure he was a poor carpenter.

And that the Virgin Mary married two of her (younger) brothers (one of whom suddenly became a carpenter in Bethlehem and who then drowned in a military campaign against Caesar) and she conveniently murdered one of them and somehow the Apostles managed to ignore this while describing her as a pure and innocent woman?

And Jesus' real name was Ptolemy XV Caesar and he's the product of 300 years of incestuous marriages?

...and the Apostles accepted this even though it violated most of their laws? And the Early Church Fathers knew nothing of this history in spite of the fact that some of them lived in Rome and others lived near Alexandria (on the other side of the Mediterranean sea) and others lived in and around Galilee... and that in spite of their education, none of them could tell the difference between any of the major cities of the world?

No offense meant here, but I find your idea very hard to believe when a simple googling of the names and histories provides so much contrary evidence.



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by interestedalways
Allow me to ask a very stupid question.

The idea actually came from an Anne Rice book.

But would it be scientifically possible to get DNA from some of the mummies and clone or revive them?



no, currently DNA needed is corrupted after a a much shorter time.



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by zazzafrazz
 


Thank you for the answer. You may know where I was going with the idea! I thought perhaps they lay waiting for the day modern science was able to bring them back to life! hahaha!



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Tesla401
 


I am sure the rock has meaning, but you don't even believe the people in the Bible are real, so it would be difficult to understand why the rock is sacred. Perhaps a King, a natural born King, sat on it 3000 years ago.

I thought the European royals tried to trace their lineage back to David? Well, at least the Kings would like to. They can't trace them back to Eve (Since she is Far East Asian), so the Ladies would trace their descent back to Hagar, not Pharoah. In the reflection, like Egypt and Sumeria, royalty traces through the feminine not the masculine. The true Masculine is destroyed in the reflection, so there is nothing to trace to.

I think that's the reason you can't understand the truth in the Bible...It's a Patriarchal book and in the reflection, the world that is estranged from its father, it is considered contraband. Evidence of a crime.

God only created One man, Adam. A king who traces his lineage back to anyone but Adam is not a King. A king who traces his lineage back to Hagar is not a king, but a prince. So, Elizabeth, who is more appropriately called a Princess (tell Her I said it too)...would only go back using maternal descent, most likely to one of Eve's two daughters and not Pharoah, who has no power to confer royal status because he is not real.

I guess that's why there is endless war in this world...A little princess wants to be Queen really bad.



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 


LOL, I like your sarcastic Really?'s because that's just what I was thinking.

Reading through this thread, I keep thinking to myself - Are these trick questions? How is anyone seeing a correlation between these Egyptian figures and the Biblical ones?

What I am curious about though...


Originally posted by Byrd
You're saying that the Virgin Mary is actually a famous ruler who was worshipped as the goddess Isis-Aphrodite, and that the Apostles didn't know the difference between a co-Pharaoh and a child of a carpenter from Bethlehem and that Jesus was actually not Jewish but Greek and that his lineage is not of the house of David but rather one of the generals of Alexander the Great?


Where does Alexander the Great and Greece come into the picture?

[edit on 2009.1/27 by the siren] - for missing punctuation

[edit on 2009.1/27 by the siren]



posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by the siren
What I am curious about though...


Originally posted by Byrd
You're saying that the Virgin Mary is actually a famous ruler who was worshipped as the goddess Isis-Aphrodite, and that the Apostles didn't know the difference between a co-Pharaoh and a child of a carpenter from Bethlehem and that Jesus was actually not Jewish but Greek and that his lineage is not of the house of David but rather one of the generals of Alexander the Great?


Where does Alexander the Great and Greece come into the picture?


Cleopatra is a Greek.

In 323 BC, Alexander the Great dies without an heir and his generals divide up the territory among themselves (his generals are all Macedonian just as he was.) Ptolemy Soter (founder of the line) ends up with Egypt: en.wikipedia.org...

He grabs Alexander's body from the others (establishing his right as heir), and eventually declares himself king. They follow the custom of the Egyptian rulers and marry their sisters... and all sorts of interesting things occur during the next 280 years, including wives who deposed and murdered their husbands and so forth.

The men are generally called Ptolemy (as their first name... as was the custom, they had four or five names plus titles) ... and are often distinguished by their not-so-flattering nicknames (one was called "fatty" by his wife.) Women were generally called Cleopatra, Berenice, or Asinoe.

The courts spoke and wrote Macedonian Greek. The coins they issue show themselves as both Greek and deities (generally the women are aspects of Aphrodite the Bountiful and the men as Dionysus.) These are the most popular gods of the Greek world, very powerful, and they try to influence the Egyptians to worship them and bring in a combined god called "Serapis".

The Egyptians don't buy it.

The Greek rulers hunker down in Alexandria (founded by Ptolemy and named after Alexander the Great), while the rest of the countryside stays poor, rural (for the most part) and Egyptian. Alexandria does have Jews as well as some Egyptians in the city, but most of the citizens are actually Greeks.

None of the Ptoloemys except Cleopatra spoke anything but Greek.

I recommend (among other things) the Michael Grant book, Cleopatra. Lots of fascinating stuff... including that Cleopatra met Herod the Great... and that he was actually afraid of her (part of the reason he built himself a large fort.) Herod put about that she tried to seduce him, but that seems to be a fiction.

She was truly a "scary barbarian queen" to the Romans and once she came into power, she began taking back all the lands that the founder of the empire (Ptolemy I) owned. She made her children rulers of several islands.

Long long long story... I'm condensing 400 pages and several books here.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by octotom

I think it should be said too that "Old Testament" is a Christian thing. It actually has nothing to do with ancient Judaism. Jews today actually get angry when you refer to the Old Testament as the Old Testament.



are you mad or what..??

The Old Testament is pre-christian..
Christian and Judaism are one and the same thing..
Therefore The Old Testament is pre-judaic..?

not so sure which paper-back you got you're information, but it's wrong

peace

daz__



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by daz__

Originally posted by octotom

I think it should be said too that "Old Testament" is a Christian thing. It actually has nothing to do with ancient Judaism. Jews today actually get angry when you refer to the Old Testament as the Old Testament.



are you mad or what..??

The Old Testament is pre-christian..
Christian and Judaism are one and the same thing..
Therefore The Old Testament is pre-judaic..?

not so sure which paper-back you got you're information, but it's wrong

peace

daz__


I cant speak for Octotom but i think theyre refering to the name? The torah is the beginninig and the end, there is no new testament added. Calling it Old Testament means that its a prequal to the real thing maybe and they fnd htis offensive? not sure.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 07:17 AM
link   
Well, Freud was also interested in the topic you are discussing here - his well-known work "Moses and Monotheism"
www.amazon.com...
Some on this board will find support to their beliefs in the person of Sigmund Freud
))
being a jew, freud demostrated some insights about linguistic issue as well.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 


Thank you, that was fascinating! One of my favourite movies of all times was 'Cleopatra', the made for TV movie (1993 I think)

I'll definitely be getting a copy of that book!



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Moses was not Egyptian by birth, but, shortly after birth, was adopted and raised by Egyptians. Therefore, his name would be reflective of the culture that raised him.

[edit on 28-1-2009 by Siren]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Now the problem reveals itself. As Byrd pointed out, it is obvious that Abraham and many other Biblical characters are different people from the historically known personalities such as Pharaoh. While it can be shown that they lived around the same time and in the same general region, are of equal social stature and made contributions to society which resemble one another but there are just as many differences as similarities.

But the OP thinks they are the same people. I still think that my solution reveals why this confusion emerges. Abraham and Pharoah are Reflections of one another, but Pharoah is blind in one Eye.

Pharoah, Caesar, Shah, Khan etc. are aspects of Adam; his reflections. The world archeologists are discovering in the sand are like finding shards of a broken mirror.

When Adam and his Kingdom fell, it continued to exist even if most of it was packed up on the backs of Donkeys and moved across a significantly changed political landscape in the middle east. He was trying to figure out what happened to Eden during his adventures. Pharoah is fallen Adam in Egypt, Alexander and Caesar are fallen Adam in Europe, Shah is fallen Adam in Persia and India, Khan is fallen Adam on the Steppe.

In Revelations, God has a "seven-fold" nature. The Beast and Dragon have seven separate heads; the fragmented reflection of God each competing (in a unending condition of war) for control of the body of fallen humanity.

The only difference to what we know about reflections is that these reflections were actually in the world with Adam; they stood face to face with him and didn't submit to his authority.

The people that composed the Bible were writing about the real image, the histories of men and archeologists are stories from the looking glass; they happened, yes, but they are not real.

But it doesn't matter as they are all gone and only Adam remains.



[edit on 28-1-2009 by huckfinn]

[edit on 28-1-2009 by huckfinn]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Grandma
 


Not sure when it changed to "Amen" at one point it was "Selah". Which means we really don't know what we are saying, who we are worshippping or giving praise to. I will research further.

[edit on 28-1-2009 by Siren]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Tesla401
 



all else is filler and fluff to make you behave a certain way.


It is kind of ironic that the ones that read and try to follow need the examples less than those who run wild, have no regard for anyone or anything and do the devil's bidding.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by huckfinn
 



But it doesn't matter as they are all gone and only Adam remains.


That has not happened yet. If it were only Adam (man "Y") remaining the world would return to a state of peace (Eden). The mingling of the seeds has made all of mankind unpure which is why it takes generations to undo the damage done by one. The evil one separated his people after enslaving humans and humans (man "Y") began to purge out the DNA of the wicked one. Currently, the evil one wants to/trying to manipulate the DNA to reintroduce his strain into humans. He only has control over what is his.




top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join