Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
The Puzzler

Pyramid Texts for Astral Travel

255 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Found the On Line book My link

Egyptian Magic By E. A. Wallis Budge

Why Moses the headless one?

Wasn't it John the Baptist?

About losing faith.... I would too if the person you were supposed to venerate showed little patience as God was reputed to have done during Moses stressful time of trying to navigate his crowd for 40 odd years... Moses must have had the patience of a saint.. or in dire need of a GPS... Surely God could have helped here.. or was he just testing him..

During the 40-year journey of the Hebrews from Egypt to Canaan, Moses received the 10 Commandments from God at Mt. Sinai. While Moses communed with God for 40 days, his followers built a golden calf. Angry, God wanted to kill them, but Moses dissuaded him. However, when Moses saw the actual shenanigans he was so angry he hurled and shattered the 2 tablets holding the 10 Commandments

and then was it God who afflicted the 10 plagues on the people of Egypt.. or was it Moses' magic?

Or was it for destroying God's work ... the tablets... in a fit of anger...?

If it were God... all people on Earth are said to be 'God's children' so would a real kind God punish all the people for something the ruler did?

Unless of course... like I see the bible going.... he favoured the Jewish people? Is that why for centuries many of the world have been victimizing those of the Jewish persuasion? Was it like sibling rivalry.. jealousy?

After all his only reported son was born to the Jewish race.. and strangely enough they have not ever capitilized on it. It was the Romans who did that....made him the biggest money spinner of all time...

My link

In the next chamber to the King's Coffins they found a golden shrine. In one cartouche the glyphs read 'RE HPRW NEB' which means GOD OF ALL HEBREWS. RE is shown with the Sun Disk glyph, and NEB - a Bowl glyph - can mean either 'Lord' or 'All'. If it precedes the noun then it means 'Lord', but when it follows the noun as it does in this case then it means 'All'. The sign for the word HEPRW is a Scarab, or Beetle, and its meaning was 'Resurrection' or 'Coming Into Existence'. The glyph is followed by three strokes indicating the plural. Thus we can regard any Ancient Egyptian who believed in the Resurrection of the Living God, as a Hebrew. In the main they were the Semite population of Lower Egypt. In the late 4th Century CE, St.Ambrose referred many times to Jesus as 'THE GOOD SCARABAEUS'. So here we have a direct link between Jesus and King Tutankhamen. The Constellation of Cancer was seen by Egyptians not only as a Crab, but also as a Beetle, and so this was the Crib of the Holy Child.

Note: In Egyptian the 'H' of 'Heprw' is aspirated like the 'ch' in Scottish 'loch'.

In the very next column on the golden shrine there are glyphs which read 'HRWN MSS YY'. This means 'Born of the Day', but pronounced it sounds like AARON MOSES YAH YAH.

YAH or IAH was another Lunar Deity. Iahmes, meaning 'Born of the Moon God Iah' was a very popular name in Egypt. Since the young King David was also seen as the son of Iah, he would also have been known by this name. As ever when transliterated into English the 'I' or 'Y' turns into the letter 'J', and so we get 'JAMES'. Names were reversed when written to put the name of God first. Turn Iahmes around and we get 'MESSIAH'.

On one wall of King David's tomb there is a painting of the HOLY TRINITY. David is shown as himself being introduced by his Ka or Holy Ghost who is also himself, to his father the mummified God Asar who also has the same features. When the son became the father he resurrected the father. Asar was renamed by the Greeks as Osiris. When the Al prefix was added, the name became Al-Osiris and then LAZARUS.

In another painting on the same wall, David is shown carrying a small CROSS to his funeral. When his mummy was anointed he became CHRIST. See Christ It must have been a headache for the story tellers who tried to turn all of these facts about the spiritual side of the young King David into a real live person. They could hardly say that he was King David, and so they wrote that he was descended from King David. The only trouble was that they slipped up when repeating this story in a second gospel, by giving different names in the genealogy of Jesus, and many more generations. The easisest way to explain James was to invent a brother. Surprisingly they completely overlooked another name - MENELEK, but then that could well have given the game away and exposed the supposed true story as being false. See Menelek to see how 'Menelek' was derived from 'Tutankhamen'.

COULD JESUS, IOSA, YMNTWTANKH, KING DAVID, AND THE MISSING PRINCE TWTMS ALL BE ONE AND THE SAME?

Edited by crystal sage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wanted to comment on some quotes CS provided in the previous post, from this web page. Mind you, this is aimed not at crystal sage but at the material in the web page. It serves as an example of the stunningly poor and misleading information one comes across on the internet. I shudder to think of some earnest and sincere young person coming across this stuff and thinking it to be the slightest legitimate. With stuff like this out there, it's no wonder so many young people are so poorly informed. Let's break it down.

In the next chamber to the King's Coffins they found a golden shrine. In one cartouche the glyphs read 'RE HPRW NEB' which means GOD OF ALL HEBREWS. RE is shown with the Sun Disk glyph, and NEB - a Bowl glyph - can mean either 'Lord' or 'All'. If it precedes the noun then it means 'Lord', but when it follows the noun as it does in this case then it means 'All'. The sign for the word HEPRW is a Scarab, or Beetle, and its meaning was 'Resurrection' or 'Coming Into Existence'. The glyph is followed by three strokes indicating the plural. Thus we can regard any Ancient Egyptian who believed in the Resurrection of the Living God, as a Hebrew. In the main they were the Semite population of Lower Egypt. In the late 4th Century CE, St.Ambrose referred many times to Jesus as 'THE GOOD SCARABAEUS'. So here we have a direct link between Jesus and King Tutankhamen. The Constellation of Cancer was seen by Egyptians not only as a Crab, but also as a Beetle, and so this was the Crib of the Holy Child.

I could be mistaken but I believe the shrine in questions is this one. This shrine is principally in honor of the titulary goddess Heret-Kau, but some of the inscriptions mentioned on the web page remind me of certain inscriptions that appear on the shrine (I have seen this shrine in person and have translated its inscriptions, but can't find my notes right now). There were several beautiful shrines found in the tomb of Tutankhamun (KV62), so it probably doesn't matter which one the web page is referencing. The more important thing is, this web page bungles historical facts every which way imaginable.

  • In the above quote the author of the web page is talking about Tut's throne name or prenomen. This is the name by which most people would've known him, actually. Properly read it is not "RE HPRW NEB" but NEB-KHEPRW-RE (transliterated as nb-xprw-ra). In the following image Tut's birth name or nomen is at left and the throne name or prenomen is at right:
  • tutcartouche.gif
  • The name most definitely does not mean "God of all Hebrews." That is nonsense. Tutankhamun reigned in the late 14th century BCE, well before the earliest identifiable emergence of the Hebrews. Even after all of this time, after all of the archaeology that has taken place in the Holy Land, all of the philology and other historical studies applied to the question, the answer remains the same. There were no Hebrews in the time of Egypt's Dynasty 18. All of the Levant was solidly Canaanite, worshipers of Baal, not Yahweh.
  • The web page does pretty well explaining the arrangement of the three glyphs (sun disk, scarab with three slashes, and basket), up until the explanation for the placement of the basket. In the ancient Egyptian language modifiers follow nouns, which the web page infers, but the author evidently doesn't really understand the language too well. In this cartouche the basket is a modifier for the scarab. It can be identified as either adverbial or adjectival and means "lordly" in this name.
  • The ancient Egyptian word for the scarab is "kheper" (xpr), and the web page's translation of "Resurrection" or "Coming Into Existence" is not too bad. More typical translations are "to manifest" or "to create" or "to transform." This is exactly what the scarab represented to the Egyptians, and why it was so prevalent in their ideology. But the three strokes indicating plurality tell us the scarab in this case is a noun, properly translated as "manifestations." Together with the modifier (the basket) we have "lordly manifestations."
  • And together with the sun disk, Tutankhamun's throne name, when properly translated, means "Lordly Manifestations of Re." This makes perfect sense from the Egyptian perspective, given Re's representation of daily life and rebirth, and the pharaoh's very close associations with that god. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the Hebrews.

Note: In Egyptian the 'H' of 'Heprw' is aspirated like the 'ch' in Scottish 'loch'.

This is an overly simplistic explanation and is in error. Most Semitic languages, to which ancient Egyptian was related, contain several different and distinct H sounds. In ancient Egyptian alone there were four, and each sound is well represented in hieroglyphs and the other scripts employed throughout pharaonic history. The well-aspirated H is different from the Scottish "loch." It's about the same as saying the name "Heather" and pronouncing the H with a bit of exaggeration. In Tutankhamun's throne name, the H sound in the scarab symbol is more guttural; it's a completely different sound. It's transliterated with a small "x" or is otherwise spelled with a "kh," in our attempts to represent this sound. The same sound appears in Tut's birth name (Tutankhamun). This has nothing whatsoever with the word Hebrew.

In the very next column on the golden shrine there are glyphs which read 'HRWN MSS YY'. This means 'Born of the Day', but pronounced it sounds like AARON MOSES YAH YAH.

:w00t: This is just patently ridiculous. I mean, does anyone take this seriously?

YAH or IAH was another Lunar Deity. Iahmes, meaning 'Born of the Moon God Iah' was a very popular name in Egypt. Since the young King David was also seen as the son of Iah, he would also have been known by this name. As ever when transliterated into English the 'I' or 'Y' turns into the letter 'J', and so we get 'JAMES'. Names were reversed when written to put the name of God first. Turn Iahmes around and we get 'MESSIAH'.

Here again the author of the web page shows his unfamiliarity with working with the language. Glyphs representing the I or Y are what we call weak consonants, which were common in ancient Egyptian. I should stress that the Y is never represented as a J, so forget that. In the United States linguists tend to prefer using a small "i" when representing a certain sound in ancient Egyptian, but in Europe linguists tend to favor a small "j" (there is some crossover, of course, but that's it in a nutshell). That's all it is: a preference in transliteration for representing a particular sound from ancient Egyptian. The "j" as in James is something entirely different and is represented in transliteration as a capital "D." It's often written informally as "dj," as in the name of the Dynasty 3 king Djoser.

And the part about Iahmes and Messiah is, well, just patently ridiculous. In hieroglyphs the glyphs representing deities were written first, a process we call honorific transposition. However, when spoken, they were not pronounced first unless that was specifically how the name was meant to be spoken. So if we were to follow the web page's logic, Tut's birth name would not be Tutankhamun but Amuntutankh. That wouldn't even make sense.

That's more than enough, I suppose. It's just more motivation to close the web browser and search out books written by professional historians. This kind of stuff will do nothing greater than contribute even more to human stupidity. :w00t:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wanted to comment on some quotes CS provided in the previous post, from this web page. Mind you, this is aimed not at crystal sage but at the material in the web page. It serves as an example of the stunningly poor and misleading information one comes across on the internet. I shudder to think of some earnest and sincere young person coming across this stuff and thinking it to be the slightest legitimate. With stuff like this out there, it's no wonder so many young people are so poorly informed. Let's break it down.

I could be mistaken but I believe the shrine in questions is this one. This shrine is principally in honor of the titulary goddess Heret-Kau, but some of the inscriptions mentioned on the web page remind me of certain inscriptions that appear on the shrine (I have seen this shrine in person and have translated its inscriptions, but can't find my notes right now). There were several beautiful shrines found in the tomb of Tutankhamun (KV62), so it probably doesn't matter which one the web page is referencing. The more important thing is, this web page bungles historical facts every which way imaginable.

  • In the above quote the author of the web page is talking about Tut's throne name or prenomen. This is the name by which most people would've known him, actually. Properly read it is not "RE HPRW NEB" but NEB-KHEPRW-RE (transliterated as nb-xprw-ra). In the following image Tut's birth name or nomen is at left and the throne name or prenomen is at right:
  • tutcartouche.gif
  • The name most definitely does not mean "God of all Hebrews." That is nonsense. Tutankhamun reigned in the late 14th century BCE, well before the earliest identifiable emergence of the Hebrews. Even after all of this time, after all of the archaeology that has taken place in the Holy Land, all of the philology and other historical studies applied to the question, the answer remains the same. There were no Hebrews in the time of Egypt's Dynasty 18. All of the Levant was solidly Canaanite, worshipers of Baal, not Yahweh.

This is an overly simplistic explanation and is in error. Most Semitic languages, to which ancient Egyptian was related, contain several different and distinct H sounds. In ancient Egyptian alone there were four, and each sound is well represented in hieroglyphs and the other scripts employed throughout pharaonic history. The well-aspirated H is different from the Scottish "loch." It's about the same as saying the name "Heather" and pronouncing the H with a bit of exaggeration. In Tutankhamun's throne name, the H sound in the scarab symbol is more guttural; it's a completely different sound. It's transliterated with a small "x" or is otherwise spelled with a "kh," in our attempts to represent this sound. The same sound appears in Tut's birth name (Tutankhamun). This has nothing whatsoever with the word Hebrew.

:w00t: This is just patently ridiculous. I mean, does anyone take this seriously?

And the part about Iahmes and Messiah is, well, just patently ridiculous. In hieroglyphs the glyphs representing deities were written first, a process we call honorific transposition. However, when spoken, they were not pronounced first unless that was specifically how the name was meant to be spoken. So if we were to follow the web page's logic, Tut's birth name would not be Tutankhamun but Amuntutankh. That wouldn't even make sense.

That's more than enough, I suppose. It's just more motivation to close the web browser and search out books written by professional historians. This kind of stuff will do nothing greater than contribute even more to human stupidity. :w00t:

^_^:tu:B);):D ... I gather all these students slept through class...

My link

^_^

LOL.. or do you like the idea of Christianity.. and the Essenes.. Hebrew originating from the Crishna's...

My link

FROM CHRISHNA TO CHRIST

By Raymond Bernard, Ph. D. (Contains Many Photographs from the rare book, Monumental Christianity By Lundy.)

This unique volume gives the true history of the Original Gospel of the Lord of Love and Master of Compassion, from which the Four Christian Gospels were Derived - A New Light on the Origin of Christianity.

It is the purpose of this book to show that the origin of the Christian religion consists in the teachings of Chrishna, savior of Ancient India, which he enunciated to his Hindu followers on the banks of the Ganges 5,000 years ago, and that these doctrines were introduced to the West during the first half of the first century by Apollonius of Tyana, who received them from his Himalayan teacher, Iarchus, during his studies in the Far East.

Apollonius introduced these doctrines among the Essenes; and those who accepted and followed the teachings of Chrishna which he brought from India became known as Chrishnaists or Christians. The doctrines of Chrishna, which were the foundation of Brahmanism, which religion Chrishna originated, were expressed in the sacred book of the Hindus, the "Bhagavad Gita" or the Song Celestial. They included belief in an immanent deity who dwells within all living creatures, plant, animal and human, and who suffers when they suffer and has joy when they are joyful. This pantheistic conception of God led to the doctrine of reverence for all life or universal compassion, which led to the practice of harmlessness and non-violence to any living creature, which meant vegetarianism and pacifism.

This philosophical and humane conception of God and the humanitarian practices that follow from this conception stands in sharp contrast with the later anthropopmorphic personal gods of the Jews and Christians, who were conceived as having a human form and, in the form of Jehovah, to have human passions, including baser ones of revengefulness, jealousy, etc. Also, being conceived as a being apart from his creations - animals and human beings - whom he fashioned from the "dust of the earth," he is not the indwelling deity of Brahmanism. The man-god of Judaism and Christianity gave man mastery over the lower animals and not only did not forbid him to kill and eat them, but encouraged and insisted on such killing in sacrifice to him in the form of burnt offerings. And, in the Old Testament, he also encouraged warfare and murder of those who refused to accept him and who worshipped other gods.

It is therefore clear that the later Western conceptions of deity are quite barbarous in comparison with the pure and humane doctrine taught by Chrishna. In his work, "Buddhism and Christianity," Arthur Lillie claims that the Essenes, who were the first Christians, derived their doctrines and practices from Buddhist missionaries who came westward during the third century B. C. during the reign of King Asoka, finding converts among them; and this explains the similarity of the life of the Essenes with that of Buddhist monks. Lillie's conclusion, based on long and careful research, is that the earliest and only authentic original gospel, or Diegesis, came from the Essenes and that all that is anti-Essene in the four best known gospels is accretion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

This too is interesting...

In a paper delivered to an ecclesiastical society entitled “Church life in the time of St. Blane” by J. Hutchison Cockburn, a former Minister of Dunblane Cathedral, Scotland, the author observes: “The Celtic Church in Ireland and in Scotland owed its origin not to Rome, but to Egypt and the East; its customs, traditions, methods, government came from Egypt through Athanasius of Alexandria, Hilary, Martin of Tours, Ninian, and through that religious channel, more than a little independent of Rome. The religious ideas of Egypt came to Scotland and Ireland and were absorbed easily into the tribal life of these countries….There is no doubt that the Celtic Church owed its ritual, its architecture, its worship and its law to Syria, Egypt and Palestine, and that its allegiance to Rome was slight.”

This is confirmed in a treatise entitled The Celtic Church and the Influence of the East (1923) by Rev. John Stirton, B.D., F.S.A. (Scot.), who notes: “S. Ninian, carrying from S. Martin at Tours the enthusiasm for monasticism and culture of the East, and, later, S. Patrick, likewise imbued with monastic zeal which he had acquired both at Lerins and at Tours—returned to their respective countries, Scotland and Ireland, and founded religious settlements which, before many years should elapse, were calculated to wield an influence universally felt not only in the British Isles but on the Continent of Europe….We thus see that the influence of Asia Minor and of Egypt came to the early Celtic Church in Britain from Gaul in two streams which eventually met and merged into one; the first came from S. Martin through S. Ninian to Whithorn, in Galloway, whence, through S. Finnian it passed to Moville in Ireland and from Moville through S. Columba to Iona and the Celts of Scotland in 563 A.D. The second originated at Lerins and through S. Martin at Tours and S. Patrick it passed to Ireland, where it joined the other….There seemed to be a peculiar affinity between the tribal or clan system of the Celts and the monasticism of Egypt. The monasterium or collegium both in Egypt and in Celtic Ireland and Scotland consisted of a number of huts which were the dwellings of the clerical and lay monks and their families, for many of the latter were married….The clergy of the Celtic Church were missionaries rather than theologians….In this respect they were like the early apostles and disciples in the Churches of Asia Minor.”

The link between the British Celtic Church and the monastic tradition of the Middle East is further supported in the following extract taken from a scholarly essay entitled The Coptic Church and Egyptian Monasticism by De Lacy O’Leary: “The formation and development of monasticism did not take place in Alexandria which was Greek-speaking and participated in Greek culture, but amongst the native Coptic-speaking Christians of Egypt, which strictly denotes the Delta, and Thebais or Upper Egypt, the whole area watered by the Nile between Aswân and the Mediterranean coast. The formation of monasticism took place in two stages: first came the solitaries, some, but by no means all, of whom were hermits or ‘desert men’; then came the formation of coenobia or monastic communities, at first simply groups of disciples gathered round some well-known and revered teacher.…The monastic life of Egypt became famous throughout the whole Christian Church, and for a long time Egypt was regarded as the ‘Holy Land’ in preference to Palestine, because there could be seen the multitudes of saintly ascetes, and Christians came as pilgrims from all parts to see and hear them. Amongst these were St. Basil the Great, the founder of Greek monasticism, Hilarion, who introduced monasticism into Palestine, Rufinus and a Roman lady named Melania who spent six months in Egypt in 373. Then in 386 St. Jerome and a wealthy widow named Paula visited the monasteries of Egypt, and of this visit St. Jerome has left us an account (Epistle 108). Palladius, Bishop of Helenopolis, spent the years 388-99 and 406-12 amongst the monks of Egypt, the former period in Thebais, the latter in Nitria.”

My link

Also...

"the original institution of Masonry consisted in the foundation of the liberal arts and sciences, but more especially in Geometry, for at the building of the tower of Babel, the art and mystery of Masonry was first introduced, and from thence handed down by Euclid, a worthy and excellent mathematician of the Egyptians; and he communicated it to Hiram, the Master Mason concerned in building Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem."

My link

I have by me, a record of a French Lodge, at the time the late Duke of Orleans, then Duke de Chartres, was Grand Master of Masonry in France. It begins as follows: "Le trentieme jour du sixieme mois de l'an de la V.L. cinq mille sept cent soixante treize;" that is, the thirteenth day of the sixth month of the year of the Venerable Lodge, five thousand seven hundred and seventy-three. By what I observe in English books of Masonry, the English Masons use the initials A.L. and not V.L. By A.L. they mean in the year of Light, as the Christians by A.D. mean in the year of our Lord. But A.L. like V.L. refers to the same chronological era, that is, to the supposed time of the creation.

religion, I have shown that the Cosmogony, that is, the account of the creation with which the book of Genesis opens, has been taken and mutilated from the Zend-Avesta of Zoroaster, and was fixed as a preface to the Bible after the Jews returned from captivity in Babylon, and that the Robbins of the Jews do not hold their account in Genesis to be a fact, but mere allegory. The six thousand years in the Zend-Avesta, is changed or interpolated into six days in the account of Genesis. The Masons appear to have chosen the same period, and perhaps to avoid the suspicion and persecution of the Church, have adopted the era of the world, as the era of Masonry. The V.L. of the French, and A.L. of the English Mason, answer to the A.M. Anno Mundi, or year of the world.

Though the Masons have taken many of their ceremonies and hieroglyphics from the ancient Egyptians, it is certain they have not taken their chronology from thence. If they had, the church would soon have sent them to the stake; as the chronology of the Egyptians, like that of the Chinese, goes many thousand years beyond the Bible chronology.The religion of the Druids, as before said, was the same as the religion of the ancient Egyptians.

from the remains of the religion of the Druids, thus preserved, arose the institution which, to avoid the name of Druid, took that of Mason, and practiced under this new name the rites and ceremonies of Druids.

Edited by crystal sage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dung beetle navigates by the stars: Both are typical Egyptian symbols: The dung beetle (Scarabaeus) and the way to the stars. Now a connection was found:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21150721

Could it be that ancient Egyptians already knew this and therefore chose the dung beetle as such an important symbol?

And if so, what does it mean in respect to pyramids?

_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.