Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

who built baalbek...and how?


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1    fantazum

fantazum

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 871 posts
  • Joined:25 Oct 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:wales

Posted 08 December 2005 - 01:13 AM






excellent pictures on this site:  http://www.prophecy.worthyofpraise.org/baalbek/

following text snagged from: http://www.geocities.com/jirimruzek/baalbek.htm

In 27 BC, the Roman emperor Augustus supposedly took the unfathomable decision to build in the middle of nowhere the grandest and mightiest temple of antiquity, the Temple of Jupiter, whose platform, and big courtyard are retained by three walls containing  twenty-seven limestone blocks, unequaled in size  anywhere in the world, as they all weigh in excess of 300 metric tons. Three of the blocks, however, weigh more than 800 tons each. This block trio is world-renowned as the "Trilithon".
  If we think within the official academic framework of history, Augustus had no obvious reasons for selecting Baalbek as the temple's building site. Supposedly, Baalbek was just a small city on a trading route to Damascus through the Bekaa  valley in Lebanese mountains, about sixty kilometers from the Mediterranean coast    (34º lat., 36º long.) It  was of no special religious significance, apart from being in the centre of a burial region, in the midst of of thousands of rock cut tombs.
But, lavishing great architecture on Baalbek then seems totally out of character for the undeniably selfish Rome, which had at the very same time been stealing historic treasures from other countries, such as the obelisks from Egypt. It makes more sense that Baalbek had something no other place could offer, not even the city of Rome, the heart of the empire. This something may also be the reason why so many people wished  to be buried there. Indeed, it has been noted that the blocks in the retaining wall  (enclosure) of the Baalbek temple site clearly look a lot more eroded than the bona fide Roman ruins of the Temple of  Jupiter, as well as those of the other two Roman temples also on the site. Therefore, the heavily eroded blocks should be much older.  
This fact naturally gives rise to a different scenario:  At Baalbek Rome had found a  fabulous ready made foundation, a mighty platform to add a suitably majestic structure to, stamping the Roman eagle upon the whole for the perception of future generations.


to read the rest:  http://www.geocities.com/jirimruzek/baalbek.htm


It would been a lot easier to simply cut stone blocks of a weight easily handled and placed in position. But the original builders of baalbeck cut blocks of stone weighing some 800 tons and apparently with little effort shifted them with ease and placed them into position with perfect accuracy.
I would claim that such a feat would be impossible using the technology of that time. It would be tremendously difficult today using all the machinery at our disposal.
So the questions are: how and why?


#2    Milo

Milo

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 278 posts
  • Joined:27 Oct 2005

Posted 08 December 2005 - 04:39 AM

also, if the romans had built it, why didn't they finish moving the half buried stone?? JMO


#3    Essan

Essan

    Recruitment Agent for the 'B' Ark

  • Member
  • 2,365 posts
  • Joined:18 Mar 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The other side

  • Stop Climate Change: Plant a Rain Forest Today!

Posted 08 December 2005 - 11:19 AM

Quote


also, if the romans had built it, why didn't they finish moving the half buried stone?? JMO


Because they found that even they couldn't move that one wink2.gif

Andy

Weather & Earth Science News
The independent climate blog

#4    Solofront

Solofront

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 381 posts
  • Joined:06 Jun 2005
  • Location:somewhere in the U.S. of A.

Posted 08 December 2005 - 02:07 PM

The romans did not build it.
"THEY BUILT ON TOP OF IT"

With the help of the annunaki, the sumerians built ballbek...
http://mars-earth.com/11face.htm

"This MASSIVE ~3 million square foot stone platform contains huge stones, including "The Trilithons' which each weigh ~1200 tons, that's 2.4 million pounds. Much later, the Greeks and Romans built their temples on top of it. Legend has it that the Sun god helios landed upon the platform with his fire chariot. The site is also described in the ancient flood tale of Gilgamesh."

Edited by Solofront, 08 December 2005 - 02:08 PM.

CHAOTIC COLLISION



A Few Features We Have:
Video Blogs
Free Advertising
Full Length Anime Episodes
Game Reviews
Game Of The Month

#5    MaNgO_gIrL_hErE

MaNgO_gIrL_hErE

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 504 posts
  • Joined:03 Jan 2004

  • Friends are quiet angels who lift us to our feet when our wings have trouble remembering how to fly

Posted 08 December 2005 - 02:38 PM

I've been there, it is extremely beautiful

"If you reveal your secrets to the wind you should not blame the wind for revealing them to the trees"
      Khalil Gibran

"The past cannot be changed,the future is still in your power"
Hugh White

Posted ImagePosted Image

#6    fantazum

fantazum

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 871 posts
  • Joined:25 Oct 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:wales

Posted 09 December 2005 - 01:46 AM

Quote


Because they found that even they couldn't move that one wink2.gif


yes and the romans were expert civil engineers skilled at shifting huge stone blocks. The had no trouble removing and shipping several ancient egyptian monoliths weighing more than 300 tons from Egypt to Rome but the baalbek blocks were beyond their ingenuity.


#7    fantazum

fantazum

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 871 posts
  • Joined:25 Oct 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:wales

Posted 09 December 2005 - 01:48 AM

Quote


I've been there, it is extremely beautiful



your very lucky as I would love to visit the place.


#8    fantazum

fantazum

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 871 posts
  • Joined:25 Oct 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:wales

Posted 09 December 2005 - 01:57 AM

Quote


The romans did not build it.
"THEY BUILT ON TOP OF IT"

With the help of the annunaki, the sumerians built ballbek...
http://mars-earth.com/11face.htm

"This MASSIVE ~3 million square foot stone platform contains huge stones, including "The Trilithons' which each weigh ~1200 tons, that's 2.4 million pounds. Much later, the Greeks and Romans built their temples on top of it. Legend has it that the Sun god helios landed upon the platform with his fire chariot. The site is also described in the ancient flood tale of Gilgamesh."


I know it sounds crazy but many years ago I read of a myth that credits the building of baalbek to the ancient baal people who later became the jews. Baalbek was according to the story the first jewish temple.
The story also goes on to accredit the construction of the ancient egyptian pyramids to the jews 3,000 years before the rise of dynastic egypt and that the exodus of the jews from egypt - an event that the rulers of egypt so oddly struggled to stop - resulted in the decline of ancient egyptian monument and pyramid building.
The legend described the jews as 'the sorcerers of stone' and that they had magical powers which they used to cut and move vast blocks of even the hardest stone.
The jew's influence upon one pharoah, Akhenaten. may have been the motivation for the egyptian adoption of the one god concept.
A stange story....and the biblical story of jericho's walls falling to the sound of a horn makes it even stranger.


#9    rohnds

rohnds

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 183 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2005
  • Location:Austin, TX

Posted 09 December 2005 - 11:52 AM

An important point that we must consider when asking such question is which pre date which. According to Sitchin Sumeria text pre date any know text and may of the stories used in the bible and other acient text are from the Sumeria text.

If the Jews build the pyramids, the question we have to ask is, who are these Jews and how did they do it? If they had magical powers, where did that power come from? And why is it that this technology and power not seen later in the history of the Jewish nation? Is it possible that these Jews obtained this power, knowledge and technology from GOD? IF that is the case, who is GOD? Alien? Human?

Rohn

The Truth Shall Set You Free

#10    Solofront

Solofront

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 381 posts
  • Joined:06 Jun 2005
  • Location:somewhere in the U.S. of A.

Posted 09 December 2005 - 01:39 PM

God is just!
He is the alpha, the omega!
Jews did not have magical powers, but the fallen angels did.
Many sumerian carvings representing the annunaki, show the annunaki with wings.
Some scholars believe the sumerians put wings on the annunaki since the annunaki were masters of flight, with their craft and all.
I do agree that they had intergallactic craft as well as craft that can "jump" from dimension too dimension, I believe that the real reason the sumerians put wings on the annunaki in their carvings, was because the annunaki "did" have wings, after all they were the fallen agnels. Even if they didn't have wings when they rebbelled against god, they could of genitically engineered some of their offspring with wings, and some without.
Many people who have witnessed angels notice wings, I believe some angels do, and simply, some do not.

CHAOTIC COLLISION



A Few Features We Have:
Video Blogs
Free Advertising
Full Length Anime Episodes
Game Reviews
Game Of The Month

#11    Essan

Essan

    Recruitment Agent for the 'B' Ark

  • Member
  • 2,365 posts
  • Joined:18 Mar 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The other side

  • Stop Climate Change: Plant a Rain Forest Today!

Posted 09 December 2005 - 03:15 PM

Quote



A stange story....and the biblical story of jericho's walls falling to the sound of a horn makes it even stranger.


Especially when you consider that at the time of Exodus, Jericho had been deserted for over 100 years and had no walls to fall......

Andy

Weather & Earth Science News
The independent climate blog

#12    fantazum

fantazum

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 871 posts
  • Joined:25 Oct 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:wales

Posted 10 December 2005 - 01:08 AM

Quote


Especially when you consider that at the time of Exodus, Jericho had been deserted for over 100 years and had no walls to fall......



From: http://www.christiancourier.com/archives/jericho.htm

The historical accuracy of the fall of Jericho has lain under a cloud of doubt in the minds of many for more than three decades. John Garstang, a professor at the University of Liverpool, excavated Jericho between 1930 and 1936. Garstang identified a destruction level at the ancient site which he called City IV. He concluded that this was the occupation level which paralleled the city of Joshua’s day, and that the biblical account was accurate. Jericho had fallen to Israel about 1400 B.C. He wrote: “In a word, in all material details and in date the fall of Jericho took place as described in the Biblical narrative” (p. 1222). For several years, scholars generally accepted Garstang’s conclusions. However, that was to radically change.

From 1952 to 1958, Kathleen Kenyon, of the British School of Archaeology (daughter of famed archaeologist, Sir Frederic Kenyon) supervised an expedition at Jericho. Her work was the most thorough and scientific that had been done at this site. Her team unearthed a significant amount of evidence, but surprisingly, Kenyon’s interpretation of the data was radically different from Garstang’s. She contended that City IV had been destroyed about 1550 B.C. and therefore there was no fortress city for Joshua to conquer around 1400 B.C. She suggested that the archaeological evidence discredited the biblical record! And, not surprisingly, a sizable segment of scholars fell dutifully into line. Whenever there appears to be an apparent conflict between the Bible and other data, there is always a certain group that immediately calls the Scriptures into question. They never have the patience to wait for the more complete picture. Comments like those of Magnusson are typical: “. . . on a purely literary level, the Book of Joshua reads more like an adventure story than history. . . there is no archaeological evidence to support it” (p. 96).

One of the most curious elements of this whole matter, however, is the fact that, prior to her death in 1978, Kathleen Kenyon’s opinions regarding Jericho had been published only in a popular book (Kenyon, 1957), in a few scattered articles, and in a series of preliminary field reports. The detailed record of her work was not made available until 1982-83, and an independent analysis of that evidence is bringing to light some startling new conclusions.

The March/April, 1990 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, certainly no “fundamentalist” journal, contains an article titled, “Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho? – A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence,” authored by Dr. Bryant G. Wood. Dr. Wood is a visiting professor in the department of Near Eastern studies at the University of Toronto. He has served in responsible supervisory positions on several archaeological digs in Palestine. In this scholarly article, Wood contends: “When we compare the archaeological evidence at Jericho with the Biblical narrative describing the Israelite destruction of Jericho, we find a quite remarkable agreement” (p. 53, emp. added). The professor emphasizes several major points of agreement between the archaeological evidence and the record in the book of Joshua. We summarize as follows:


The Bible indicates that Jericho was a strongly fortified city. It was surrounded by a “wall,” and access to the fortress could only be obtained through the city “gate” (Joshua 2:5,7,15; 6:5,20). Biblical Archaeology Review notes: “The city’s outer defenses consisted of a stone revetment wall [some 15 feet high] at the base of the tell [hill] that held in place a high, plastered rampart. Above the rampart on top of the tell was [the remnant of] a mudbrick wall [about 8 feet high at one point] which served as Jericho’s city wall proper” (see Wood, p. 46).

According to the Old Testament, the invasion occurred just following the 14th day of Abib (March/April) (Joshua 5:10), thus in the springtime, or in the harvest season (3:15). Rahab was drying flax upon her roof (2:6). Both Garstang and Kenyon found large quantities of grain stored in the ruins of Jericho’s houses. In a very limited excavation area, Kenyon found six bushels of grain in one digging season – “This,” as Wood comments, “is unique in the annals of Palestinian archaeology” (p. 56).

The biblical record affirms that the conquest was swiftly accomplished in only seven days (6:15). The people of Jericho were confined to the city with no chance to escape (6:1). The abundance of food supplies, as indicated above, confirms this. Had the citizens of Jericho been able to escape, they would have taken food with them. Had the siege been protracted, the food would have been consumed. The Old Testament record is meticulously accurate.

When the Israelites shouted with a great shout on that seventh day, the “wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city” (6:20; cf. Hebrews 11:30). Kenyon’s excavations uncovered, at the base of Jericho’s tell, a pile of red mudbricks which, she said, “probably came from the wall on the summit of the bank” (Kenyon, 1981, p. 110; as quoted in Wood, p. 54). She described the brick pile as the result of a wall’s “collapse.” Professor Wood states that the amount of bricks found in the cross-section of Kenyon’s work area would suggest an upper wall 6.5 feet wide and 12 feet high (p. 54).

According to the Scriptures, Jericho was to be a city “devoted” to God, hence, the Hebrews were to confiscate the silver and gold, and the vessels of brass and iron for Jehovah’s treasury. However, they were to take no personal possessions (6:17-19). The archaeological evidence confirms this. As indicated earlier, a considerable amount of grain was found in Jericho. Grain, in biblical times, was exceedingly valuable, being frequently used as a monetary exchange (see 1 Kings 5:11). It is therefore unthinkable, unless by divine design, that the Israelites would have taken Jericho, and left the grain intact. The Bible is right!

The Scriptures state that during the destruction of Jericho, the city was set on fire (6:24). When Miss Kenyon dug down into the city she discovered that the walls and floors of the houses were “blackened or reddened by fire. . . in most rooms the fallen debris was heavily burnt” (Kenyon, 1981, p. 370; as quoted in Wood, p. 56).

The Bible indicates that Rahab’s house was built “upon the side of the wall, and she dwelt upon the wall” (2:15). A number of houses were found just inside the revetment wall, which could have abutted the wall [see point (1) above], thus easily accommodating an escape access from the city (Wood, p. 56). The evidence indicates that this area was the “poor quarter” of the city – just the type of residence that one might expect a harlot to have.

Whereas Kathleen Kenyon contended that Jericho (City IV) had been destroyed about 1550 B.C., and abandoned thereafter, hence, there was no city for Joshua to conquer in 1400 B.C. (according to the biblical chronology), the actual evidence indicates otherwise. A cemetery outside of Jericho “has yielded a continuous series of Egyptian scarabs [small, beetle-shaped amulets, inscribed on the underside, often with the name of a pharaoh] from the 18th through the early-14th centuries B.C.E., contradicting Kenyon’s claim that the city was abandoned after 1550 B.C.E.” (Wood, p. 53).
Other evidences indicate a harmony with the biblical chronology as well. There is absolutely no reason to contend that the book of Joshua is in error in its description of the conquest of Jericho.


Moral Difficulties
Some have argued that the account of Jericho’s destruction places the Bible in a morally compromising position. It is alleged that Rahab’s lies (Joshua 2:4-5) condone situation ethics, and that the slaughter of the city’s women and children (Joshua 6:21) is reprehensible – a reflection upon a benevolent God. These objections simply are not valid.

First, one should note that the Scriptures do not attempt to conceal Rahab’s falsehood. Her weakness is bluntly revealed. This evidences the impartiality of the divine record and is an indirect suggestion of inspiration. Too, one should understand that this woman was from a pagan environment. Her concept of morality and her personal lifestyle (she was a harlot) needed considerable refining. In spite of her sordid background, she had developed a sincere faith in Israel’s God (see Joshua 2:9ff). Consequently, when the spies approached her, she was not “disobedient” as were the others of Jericho. She received the spies and sent them out another way. It was by these “works” of faith that she was delivered (Hebrews 11:31; James 2:25). She was not “justified” by lying; rather, she was justified by her faith and her works, in spite of her ignorance and/or weakness. It would be a gross misuse of this narrative to employ it as proof that there are occasions when it is divinely permissible to lie.

We must not pass from this point without noting that the case of Rahab demonstrates the wonderful harmony between faith and works in the divine plan. The writer of Hebrews states that Rahab perished not, as a result of her faith; James declares that she was justified by her works. These two requirements are not mutually exclusive of one another.

Second, while the extermination of an entire population may seem excessively cruel when viewed as an isolated incident, other factors shed light on that situation. Consider the following:


The destruction of Canaan’s heathen tribes was justified in view of their utter abandonment of moral restraint. The ancient evidence indicates that they practiced child-sacrifice, religious prostitution, sodomy, etc. A people can reach a state of such deep depravity that the justice of God demands punishment.

Their destruction had not been rendered impetuously. Jehovah had been patient with them for more than 500 years; finally, their cup of iniquity ran over and the time for judgment came (see Genesis 15:16).

This type of punishment was implemented on a rather limited basis – principally, upon the tribes of Palestine. This was due to the fact that God had chosen Canaan as the place where the Hebrew nation was to be cultivated in view of the coming Messiah, the Savior of the world. It was an example of moral surgery for the benefit of all mankind.

Finally, it is still true that these Old Testament narratives illustrate the fact that innocent people (e.g., infants) frequently have to suffer the consequences of evil acts which others generate, due to the kind of world in which we live. This should motivate us to want a better state wherein wickedness does not exist.
And so, though such cases as the fall of Jericho may entail some difficulty, the problem is not insurmountable.


The Prophetic Curse
Following the destruction of Jericho, Joshua pronounced an imprecation upon the ancient city, saying: “Cursed be the man before Jehovah that riseth up and buildeth this city Jericho: with the loss of his firstborn shall he lay the foundation thereof, and with the loss of his youngest son shall he set up the gates of it” (Joshua 6:26).

Some writers have assumed that this prophecy failed, for not many years after Jericho’s fall, one reads of people living in Jericho (see Joshua 18:21; Judges 3:13; 2 Samuel 10:5). In fact, it is specifically called “the city of Jericho.” And yet, there is no record of the “curse” being fulfilled in those times proximate to Joshua’s invasion.

In response to this charge, several factors need to be noted. First, the prophetic curse did not state that Jericho was never to be inhabited. It does not even indicate that the city was never to be rebuilt. The divine prediction was simply this: The man who attempts to rebuild Jericho, as a fortress city (cf. “set up the gates of it,” 6:26) would be the recipient of the divine curse (see Coslinga, p. 73).

The fact of the matter is, five and a half centuries later, during the reign of Ahab of Israel, Hiel of Bethel rebuilt Jericho as a fortress. And, precisely as Joshua had declared, he lost his oldest son when the foundation was laid, and his youngest son when the gates of the city were set up (see 1 Kings 16:34). The prophecy was fulfilled. There is no discrepancy in the Bible record.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SOURCES

Coslinga, C.J. (1986), Joshua, Judges, Ruth (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).

Garstang, John (1937), “Jericho and the Biblical Story,” Wonders of the Past, ed. J. A. Hammerton (New York: Wise).

Kenyon, Kathleen (1957), Digging Up Jericho (London: Ernest Benn).

Kenyon, Kathleen (1981), Excavations at Jericho, Vol. 3: The Architecture and Stratigraphy of the Tell, ed. Thomas A. Holland (London: British School of Archaeology).

Magnusson, Magnus (1977), Archaeology of the Bible (New York: Simon & Schuster).

Wood, Bryant G. (1990), “Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho? – A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence,” Biblical Archaeology Review, 16[2]:44-58.



#13    fantazum

fantazum

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 871 posts
  • Joined:25 Oct 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:wales

Posted 10 December 2005 - 01:12 AM

Quote


An important point that we must consider when asking such question is which pre date which. According to Sitchin Sumeria text pre date any know text and may of the stories used in the bible and other acient text are from the Sumeria text.

If the Jews build the pyramids, the question we have to ask is, who are these Jews and how did they do it? If they had magical powers, where did that power come from? And why is it that this technology and power not seen later in the history of the Jewish nation? Is it possible that these Jews obtained this power, knowledge and technology from GOD? IF that is the case, who is GOD? Alien? Human?

Rohn


the jews dont have  a name for god in their original holy scripture...they only refer to "those who came from the skies"


#14    angrycrustacean

angrycrustacean

    pǝʇsıʍʇ

  • Member
  • 3,024 posts
  • Joined:28 Jul 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ǝɹǝɥʇ ʞɔɐq

Posted 10 December 2005 - 01:19 AM

Quote


Especially when you consider that at the time of Exodus, Jericho had been deserted for over 100 years and had no walls to fall......


I read an interesting book a while ago by David Rohl, an egyptologist, called A Test of Time. He's an atheist, but  thinks that the Bible can still be used as a historical reference book. Throughout the book he proves several times that the Egyptian monarchy chronology used as a reference point for Biblical dates was in fact skewed.

I forget how much the inaccuracy was, but with new, revised dates using newer information from Egyptian tombs, the author managed to provide considerable evidence that Jericho was in fact a flourishing trade city at the time when the 'walls fell'. I was skeptical myself, but he gave a great deal of credible evidence. His new chronology also fits several other Biblical events. If you're interested in the subject I suggest reading his book.

Posted Image
  


#15    Essan

Essan

    Recruitment Agent for the 'B' Ark

  • Member
  • 2,365 posts
  • Joined:18 Mar 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The other side

  • Stop Climate Change: Plant a Rain Forest Today!

Posted 10 December 2005 - 11:25 AM

You're right AC original.gif  Must dig Rohl's books out at the local library again!

Andy

Weather & Earth Science News
The independent climate blog




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users