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.

 

Pyramids not mentioned in the Bible?

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 08:43 PM
link   
I have been reading the Bible lately and, regardless any personal beliefs, you cannot deny the poetic genius contained in its text. I have made numerous comparisons among three separate King James versions of the book, one of them translated. I cannot say enough about the amazing parallels to current life spoken in all of them to which I find very convincing. There is, however, one thing confusing me and that is Egyptian Pyramids?

Of the many accounts told over hundreds of years from various individuals, not one mention of Pyramids anywhere? These mega structures would have been smack in the middle of these times. There's even an account of God destroying Egypt completely, yet the Pyramids still stand today? Am I missing something?

If anyone can help me understand this it would be greatly appreciated. I am in no way trying to debunk the Bible, just trying to understand it better.

Peace!




posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Zerbst
 


That's right, the Bible does not say that Jewish slaves built the Pyramids. In fact the pyramids were thousands of years old at the time of Moses and would have been old even at the time of Abraham.

At the time of Moses, the art of pyramid building was long forgotten and the Egyptians buried their dead Pharohs in tombs in the Valley of the Kings.

This in no way proves or disproves the Exodus. I do not find it surprising that the pyramids were not mentioned. I would point out that the Temple of Karnak, the Temple of Ramses, and other architectural wonders were also not mentioned. Neither was the pantheon of Egyptian gods. Why is that?

My personal opinion is that the Exodus took place at an earlier date than the generally accepted time frame of Seti and Ramses. I think that it took place during the reign of Akhenaten. So, the area around Giza is not mentioned because all the action is taking place at Amarna. Amarna was utterly destroyed and very little remains.

I think that one of the reasons that archaeology has been unable to verify the events in the Bible is that the timeline that is being applied is wrong and archaeologists are looking in the wrong places for the evidence.

An earlier Exodus would also explain why archaeology has been unable to find artifacts dating from the reign of King David and King Solomon. These two kings of Israel were highly influential to say the least, and yet their existance has not been verified by scientific evidence. None of the artifacts in Israel seem to match the assumed timeline.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:18 PM
link   
I rekon the pyramid's was not worth mentioning.


They did how ever name the king's or pharaoh's..
I think it give's the exact name as inscribed on there tomb's and final resting place.


i don;t remember there exact name's lol

but it's in the Moses story.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:21 PM
link   
I believe Dr.Gene Scott of the L.A. University Cathedral is an expert on the Pyramids. I also recall he found some evidence that Enoch built the 3 pyramids in Egypt. I will see what I can dig up.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by lunarminer
 


Well you know, it could also be evidence that the Bible was simply created by the Romans in order to enslave a population. There are multiple examples of things that were left out, which should not have been.

Virgin Birth among others is the most notable, the Pyramids ofcourse. The timeline wasn't wrong, the story was made up.

Now I don't mean to bash anybody's religion or anything. Christians could very well be right, but basing their whole religion on a text that is impossible to verify as either legitimate or faked is rather odd. This document could have been re-written hundreds of times before it became what we know today as the modern version (King James).

Just a thought....

~Keeper



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Double Post, Sorry Mods...


~Keeper

[edit on 4/5/2009 by tothetenthpower]



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:31 PM
link   
The historian Josephus writes that the Pyramid of Giza was "built by descendants of Seth". The ancients called it the "Pillar of Enoch".

I found this site which should prove to be informative:

www.prepare-ye-the-way.com...




posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower


Virgin Birth among others is the most notable, the Pyramids ofcourse. The timeline wasn't wrong, the story was made up.

Now I don't mean to bash anybody's religion or anything. Christians could very well be right, but basing their whole religion on a text that is impossible to verify



Good try


It's not just the "Christians" but also the Jews and the Muslim. The exodus is from the old testament.

Christians focus mostly on the new testament.




[edit on 5-4-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I aplogize, I should generalize more. Organized Religion, there that should do it.

I'm only attempting to explore alternative answers. Occam's Razor usually applies in any given situation
.

Thanks for keeping me on my toes
.

~Keeper



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by lunarminer
 


Well you know, it could also be evidence that the Bible was simply created by the Romans in order to enslave a population. There are multiple examples of things that were left out, which should not have been.


Your speculation, assumption, hypothesis, theory, or whatever you want to call it does nothing to help.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I hear ya

For me I don't put much faith in the old testament as far as an accurate story of history. I think that by the time the stories which are from all over the cradle of civilization and not just from the Hebrew faith were finally written down in the earliest form of the bible after being passed down by word of mouth for generations could be way off.

Sort of like when we were kids and played telephone and being a giant game of telephone, the stories at the end are way off than from the beginning. You know being passed down through the generations and of course the ones telling the stories can always make it out as if they were the good guys and so on.

So the time lines could also be off.




[edit on 5-4-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by lunarminer
 


There is no conclusive proof as to the Pharaoh that reigned during the Exodus, but the alternate line of thought says that it was Amenhotep II. (Akhenaten was the son of Amenhotep III, and was alternately known as Amenhotep IV. Of course, Akhenaten's claim to fame was to allegedly be the first ruler of historical record to institute monotheism. Upon his death, his successors quickly reverted to polytheism.

This alternate theory is supported by I Kings 6:1:



And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month of Zif, which is the second month that he began to build the house of the Lord


Accepting that Solomon's reign started in 970BC, four years into his reign gets us to 966BC, then working back 480 years, takes us to 1446BC. That would be during the reign of Amenhotep II.

HOWEVER, there is confusion as to whether 1 KINGS was referring to the SOLAR year or LUNAR year, which was the commonly used year. 480 lunar years is about 466 solar years. In addition, there are other complications, regarding the differences between the Gregorian calendar and the Aristean calendar.

This issues aside, it is certainly likely that it was during the reign of the Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by John Matrix
 


How does it not help? You implied that the timeline was wrong, I implied that it was made up. It's a resonable theory that merits discussion don't you think?

Unless the thought of the Bible being a hoax really offends you to the core, then by all means, omit my posts from the thread, along with any other members who would dare challenge your faith
.

~Keeper



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:01 PM
link   
The great pyramid of Giza IS mentioned in the bible, you must however understand what you're reading. Isaiah 19: 19-20.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zerbst
Of the many accounts told over hundreds of years from various individuals, not one mention of Pyramids anywhere? These mega structures would have been smack in the middle of these times.


Were they supposed to be directly named out as they are known today or what? Would what is known as the Great Pyramid today have been called that back during those times? Accordingly, perhaps the biblical scribes "deliberately obscured" their names?

Furthermore, you mixing biblical chronology up. Most biblical scholars place the Israelites in Egypt during the time period when the Egyptians were building mud-brick pyramids. It is here that even Jewish historian Josephus wrote concerning the Israelite slaves in Egypt, "They [the Egyptian taskmasters] set them also to build pyramids."






There's even an account of God destroying Egypt completely, yet the Pyramids still stand today? Am I missing something?


Yes, you are missing something: God did not "destroy" Egypt "completely;" it was merely 'visited' by 10 plagues. Conversely, from a biblical perspective, Sodom and Gomorrah would be best viewed as "completely destroyed;" Egypt was not.

[edit on 5-4-2009 by Seekerof]



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:05 PM
link   
Isaiah 19: 19,20 talks of an altar of witness to the Lord in the Last days. This altar is situated in the midst of Egypt and at the border of Egypt. The Great Pyramid is in the midst of Egypt but it also marks the ancient border of Upper and Lower Egypt. In the Hebrew, there are 30 words in this text. when you add up all the numerical values of the text the value is 5449. The Great Pyramid is 5449 sacred inches high.

You can read more about this here:
www.prepare-ye-the-way.com...

[edit on 6/4/09 by John Matrix]



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Zerbst
 


why dont you try another perspective of it in the point of view of the egyptians pharaohs? they never mentioned the names of those biblical figures but the pharaohs and how long their reigns are well recorded for their posterity?is there something they wont let us in to?



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by enkira
 





why dont you try another perspective of it in the point of view of the egyptians pharaohs? they never mentioned the names of those biblical figures but the pharaohs and how long their reigns are well recorded for their posterity?is there something they wont let us in to?


My post above tells you the two most likely Pharaohs. The 18th Dynasty was very ego-centric. You will find few references to outside societies or peoples.



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by John Matrix
 


How does it not help? You implied that the timeline was wrong, I implied that it was made up. It's a resonable theory that merits discussion don't you think?

Unless the thought of the Bible being a hoax really offends you to the core, then by all means, omit my posts from the thread, along with any other members who would dare challenge your faith
.

~Keeper


You can't prove your view is right and I can't prove my view is right. So what's the point in arguing about it.

The bible is many things to many people, but it's not a hoax.
Prejudice is not your friend. It blinds you from the truth.


[edit on 6/4/09 by John Matrix]



posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 10:24 PM
link   
While you may have a point regarding the New Testament, since the Christian Bible was compiled after the reign of Constantine. Constantine did not invent Christianity however, he simply used it as a vehicle to enhance his power.

The Old Testament is quite another thing, there are examples of Old Testament scriptures that predate the Romans. So, your theory falls apart when applied to the Exodus.




top topics



 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join