Egypt is the origin of Christianity, Judaism & Islam

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by The Telcontarion

Well, what I mean is that I was raised christian; went to church every sunday, the whole bit. You may not be familiar with the anglican church, there are not many in america, however it is the dominant christian church in jamaica or any other english speaking caribbean island. It is very similar to the catholic church. I was a christian because my parents wanted me to be not because of choice.

it isn't THAT similar to the Catholic Church. Even Orthodox Christianity is closer to Catholicism than the Anglican Church, for logical reasons. But thats a subject for my future thread...

So I believed as all christians do and basically have the same beliefs today. The difference now is that, that belief is based on, and tempered with, research and knowledge (as the topic of this thread) as oppose to blind faith, which is the way the masses have ever been enslaved.

Evil...mysterious people that...control the world! THEY aren't Mislead, are they?

I believe I have far more faith now than I ever had, and it increases daily. So I find it quite strange indeed, when some would say that I merely would believe anything, when they are just simply acting through faith with out varifiable truth and knowledge.

With all due respect, how do you know that you aren't the one being fooled in believing conspiracy theories? How sure is your info?

Maybe the government wants you to believe in conspiracies so they cna control your thinking in one direction to distract you from things truthful going on right under your nose? We'll never know.

[Elfhelm]

Originally Posted by Spock

Here we go again!

This topic has about run its course. Too many side trips to theocracy, narcissism and their ilk.

Keep to the topic-which I repeat, has really exceeded it's definition.

I am very confused, Spock. Isn't the topic that Egypt is the origin of Christianity. And have I not argued that the origin of Christianity is elsewhere?

hb, sycreticism is not plagiarism...

But you do have a great point that some ideas might simply be true and therefore shared by many cultures by virtue of their inner veracity.

edit: Spock, are you telling us to stick to the topic of Ossama Alsaadawi and his mistranslation of heiroglyphs?

[Rosie Gamgee]

Not trying, really, to perpetuate the off-topic-ness; I just wanted to know:

Originally Posted by Elfhelm

By the way, it's off topic, but Rosie is referencing John 14:6. If you read the entire chapter, and compare it to the Bhagavad Gita, you might find that it means something quite different than what she thinks it means. Remember Atma means "the self" or "I am"! When Christ says "I am" or "me" try it with the word Atma, and when Krishna says "Atma" try it with "I am". Christ, Krishna, Chist, Krishna... is there a pattern here?

So what you are trying to say is.. that Jesus was saying that 'the self' is the way? Sorry, I don't mean to be daft.. I just cannot see what you are getting at.

[Rosie Gamgee]

Sorry about perpetuating the off-topicness, Spock. I'll try to be brief.

Originally Posted by Count Comfect

Off topic, but given how far away the topic actually seems to be...


I feel this is wrong. It DOES make them less Jews, because Judaism does not accept Jesus as the Messiah or the validity of the New Testament. Jews are defined (partly, at least) by only accepting the Tanakh - the Old Testament. I'm not here to quarrel about Heaven, that's your own opinion as expressed, but the bit about not being any less Jews is, I feel, not true.

As far as I know, any Jew will tell you that there is a promised Messiah. Most will tell you He is yet to come, and the Jesus was NOT Him. Some will tell you that Messiah has come, and fulfill the law. They are still Jews. If and when the non-Messianic Jews (the ones who believe in Jesus generally call themselves 'Messianic Jews') recognize someone as their Messiah, it will not make them any less Jews. They will simply see the fulfilment of their hope.

EDIT: And a PS
Not in any Seder (the Passover meal) I've ever attended, they don't. You drink 4 cups of wine, but their significance is not Messianic (they mark the 4 stages of the Seder) and you eat matzah, the "bread of affliction" to remind you of slavery in Egypt (aha! Topic!), but there is no Messianic message.

Maybe I can find a link... Give me a while.

[Elfhelm]

Originally Posted by Rosie Gamgee

Not trying, really, to perpetuate the off-topic-ness; I just wanted to know:


So what you are trying to say is.. that Jesus was saying that 'the self' is the way? Sorry, I don't mean to be daft.. I just cannot see what you are getting at.

The translation of the word Atman as "Self" is bizarre. I never understood it. It certainly doesn't mean "the self", as you are using it. Yet it does mean something more akin to the "I am" which is referenced in Genesis and the Gospel of John.

What I was trying to communicate is several things. One, which I showed with maps, is that Abraham came from Kush, his descendants settled in Canaan, Jacob (Israel) had a son, Joseph, who was sold into slavery in Egypt. His family moved there. After 400 years they were freed and moved back to Canaan. This was brilliantly disproven by Telecontrarian with the simple phrase "it's a lie".

Another is that there are many sources, not one origin to Christianity. There are elements of Hinduism, Mithraism, Essene Judaism, and Greek mystery cult practices, and that is BEFORE it picked up the pagan rites of Easter, Halloween, Christmas, etc. as it is practiced today.

So to say it all came from Egypt, and that the heiroglyphs prove it, and to use a method of translation that is disputed by EVERY Egyptologist of any merit, is basically er... a lie.

[Rosie Gamgee]

Okay, I get it now. Sorry.

btw,here's a bit of a link I found... doesn't really say it all, but it's something.

[The Telcontarion]

Originally Posted by Elfhelm

This was brilliantly disproven by Telecontrarian with the simple phrase "it's a lie".

Well I am sure I have more than one reply to this thread, in making my arguement. I suppose your points are simply proven by saying it is so without any proofs/references given - as ever is the case with you. Not so at all with all that I have presented here.

Hectorberlioz, why do I have to repeat myself again, I have already stated even though I believe these things, that does not mean that I could not be wrong, this thread is about discussing the possibilities. I really am getting tired of repetitive non points made, as appose to making a real arguement or are you not able to make a compelling arguement; are you just disagreeing for disagreeing sake? I know you are young and inexperienced and it might be alittle hard for you, but try, try and make a compellling argument, Ok.

[Elfhelm]

Dear Sir, which point that I made was lacking a reference? It will be my privilege to rectify that error immediately! I have a library full of references and a lifetime of research. I thought that I did supply all necessary information, but if there is anything in particular that I neglected to cite, please do me the honor of asking.

On the other hand, you, Sir, have provided nothing but a link to the works of Ossama Alsaadawi. Since he is not here to support his theories, and you have stated that you agree with them, it is only reasonable for us to ask you to actually argue the point, rather than to simply dismiss every counter argument as a lie.

Thanks.

[The Telcontarion]

Originally Posted by Elfhelm

The translation of the word Atman as "Self" is bizarre. I never understood it. It certainly doesn't mean "the self", as you are using it. Yet it does mean something more akin to the "I am" which is referenced in Genesis and the Gospel of John.

What I was trying to communicate is several things. One, which I showed with maps, is that Abraham came from Kush, his descendants settled in Canaan, Jacob (Israel) had a son, Joseph, who was sold into slavery in Egypt. His family moved there. After 400 years they were freed and moved back to Canaan. This was brilliantly disproven by Telecontrarian with the simple phrase "it's a lie".

Another is that there are many sources, not one origin to Christianity. There are elements of Hinduism, Mithraism, Essene Judaism, and Greek mystery cult practices, and that is BEFORE it picked up the pagan rites of Easter, Halloween, Christmas, etc. as it is practiced today.

So to say it all came from Egypt, and that the heiroglyphs prove it, and to use a method of translation that is disputed by EVERY Egyptologist of any merit, is basically er... a lie.

where is the reference? Giving links to maps and qouting the bible? The bible is not academic.

I gave you extensive academic proofs as presented by the Doctor, as well as the academic forums which had at least 10 professional egyptologists debating Alsadawi with most of them agreeing. I gave the link to the audio of his interview.

"It is only reasonable for us to ask you to actually argue the point, rather than to simply dismiss every counter argument as a lie."

You are the one dismissing my points from the very beggining and have yet to provide one compelling argument. You again are tryin to play with words and accuse me of doing exactly as you are doing. The only compeling argument that was given in this entire debate was when Count Comfect made his, "the rhetoric" argument.

Further more, as we are talking about the past, if you were so confident in your arguments why didn't you post the link to the entire debate instead of an excerpt, as i had requested, 5 times no less. I had to post it myself, I see you are careful not to mention that again.

Also, you are clever again, as you have changed your original arguement so as to not sound totally incredible given the info I have presented. Now you admit that there is evidence that suggests that elements of christianity did arise from egypt, without admiting the change to me and without admitting that my arguments hold some merit. your origianl position:

Originally Posted by Elfhelm

Do you know what henotheism is? It comes between polytheism and monotheism in the evolution of religion. It has happened many times in many places. Sometimes it turns into monotheism. This is a natural process. Just because it happens in two places doesn't mean it SPREAD from one place to another. Remember, two people invented the radio at the same time. The human collective has zeitgeists, ideas that are right for that stage of the human evolution of ideas. Look at the henotheism of Krishna worship. It's still around today. The Hindus still accept that the other gods exist, but they worship Krishna because he taught them how to find satori.

So just because there was monotheism for a few years in Egypt doesn't mean the monotheism that developed in Canaan was caused by it. And really, it's not necessary to draw bloodlines to prove intellectual influences.

Less ****, more study, I say.

Elfhelm, hahaa...sigh , I seriously doubt your intentions. Give it up please.

Your horse is dead already for Osiris' sake, stop beating it.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by Rosie

He said at the Last Supper, "This is the New Covenant in my blood." In other words, "This cup of wine (oh, btw, they were eating the Passover meal. The cup and the bread have special Messianic significance in the Passover) represents the new covenant that I make with my blood."

Side note: I love it when people say: "Jesus said, "This is my body." Therefore, it is OBVIOUS that he signified by those words "This represents my body." Sorry folks, "is" and "represents are two VERY different things.

Then He said, "When you drink it, remember Me."

No he didn't, he said "Do this in remembrance of Me."

Originally Posted by Count Comfect

I feel this is wrong. It DOES make them less Jews, because Judaism does not accept Jesus as the Messiah or the validity of the New Testament. Jews are defined (partly, at least) by only accepting the Tanakh - the Old Testament. I'm not here to quarrel about Heaven, that's your own opinion as expressed, but the bit about not being any less Jews is, I feel, not true.

Hmm, does that mean, CC, that Orthodox Jews, who "accept" the Talmud are not Jews?

But anyway, yes, Rosie, canonical Judaism considers any Jew who believes that Jesus is the Messiah to be an apostate of the Jewish faith, as I understand it.

[Count Comfect]

Gwaimir - the Talmud is primarily composed of commentary on the meaning of the Tanakh. But I did mispeak. When I said "only," I meant out of 2 Testaments, you take only one. Yes, the Talmud is canonical.

As for Jesus, what Gwaimir said is correct.

[Elfhelm]

Well, I checked in to see if there was any specific reference request, and there wasn't. What is here is:

1. A repeated bunch of nonsense about posting the entire website of egyptologist.com into this thread. Absurd. I quoted ONE Egyptologist. He made a very good argument to Alsaadawi almost TEN YEARS AGO. I copied that argument. Furthermore, there is NO COMPULSION here that can force another person to post anything. The sum total and only intent I had in providing that Egyptologist's essay was to provide an academic argument that I considered entirely persuasive. Attempting to compel me to post less persuasive, non-academic, or poorly-thought-out opinions from the same site is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT and proves only that he who is making such a request did not understand either the motive behind the quote, or for that matter, the value of the quote, and to the point, the meaning of the quote, if he even read it.

2. Some sort of claim that I changed my stance, as if, even it were true, that were erroneous. I did not change my stance, but even if I had it would have been because I learned something new which convinced me that an earlier idea was innaccurate. I do that all the time. When I was 19 I thought in absolutes, but now I am 50 and everything seems so blended together that at times I find I must embrace opposite points of view and let them both live together for a time. However, I have not done that here. My first statement was that the monotheism of Akanaten was in fact henotheism in one area of the world while the monotheism of the Jews developed from henotheism in Canaan. I can get sources on that, if anyone wants it. My second point, that the eucharist developed from Greek mystery cults that developed from Osirian rites does not conflict with that. And I can get you sources on that, too.

However, your contention remains that the heiroglyphs have been mistranslated and that Osama Alsadaawi has correctly translated them. And that Alsadaawi's translations demonstrate that Islam existed in ancient Egypt. That is your and Alsadaawi's claim. That is the argument here. It has nothing to do with Greek mystery cults or the eucharist.

So while I may be able to show some influences across cultures, that is simply because cultures that trade together, think together. But that does NOT support Alsadaawi in any way.

But your premise has been utterly disproven by many fine scholars, and is entirely unsupportable except within its own tautology.

[Rosie Gamgee]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

Side note: I love it when people say: "Jesus said, "This is my body." Therefore, it is OBVIOUS that he signified by those words "This represents my body." Sorry folks, "is" and "represents are two VERY different things.

If you picked up a cracker and said, "This is my body," do you think that people would think you meant it was your actual flesh and blood? It would be quite obvious to those people that you didn't mean that, unless you were crazy. If Jesus was crazy, why did nearly all His disciples sacrifice their lives for what He taught? (Oh, wait; I know! They were crazy, too.)

No he didn't, he said "Do this in remembrance of Me."

What is the difference?

But anyway, yes, Rosie, canonical Judaism considers any Jew who believes that Jesus is the Messiah to be an apostate of the Jewish faith, as I understand it.

And yet, if they did recognize a Messiah, Jesus or someone else, they would still consider themselves Jews.

Let me say for the record that this is my last post in this thread. If you want to speak to me on the subject, feel free to PM. I'm tired of the squabbling. It's getting too heated, people.

[Spock]

Originally Posted by Elfhelm

,.
within its own tautology.

Tautology= a : needless repetition of an idea, statement, or word b : an instance of tautology.

Nice one.

[Elfhelm]

It does seem like somebody lit a fire in here, but I believe it is the person who is running away with the gas can.

I didn't bring up the eucharist with the intent of highlighting a disagreement about transubstantiation. I think even those who see the eucharist as symbolic would have to acknowlege the connection to other eucharistic traditions in the region at the time. It has been explored by many modern writers, but I'll just reference Karl Jung for now.

Anyway, I still say that this ritual is not proof of the ORIGIN of three of the world's largest religion. It is, however, evidence that new religions actually arise out of older religions.

[The Telcontarion]

Originally Posted by Elfhelm

And that Alsadaawi's translations demonstrate that Islam existed in ancient Egypt.

When have I ever said this, quote me. Why play these games. You still think you need to defend "western civilization?"

You really disappointment. All you do is make stuff up about what I say and post things out of context. Something is seriously wrong with you.

Again, I want you to quote me!!! Quote me!!! Quote me!!!...I dear you!!!

[Elfhelm]

So you are NOT saying that Islam was practiced in Ancient Egypt? Do you realize that Alsadaawi is translating the heiroglyphs as KORAN QUOTES? What does that amount to, if not what I read?

On 12/4/2003 1:31:19 PM Ossama Alsaadawi wrote:

In fact, the AE religious Hieroglyphic texts not only conducted or crept into the Holy Quran but it crept before that into the Torah and the Bible. There are many mutual and common holy texts and religious stories in all those Holy Scriptures the origin of which was Ancient Egypt. Take for example the Holy Spirit, Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Ismail, Israel, Moses, Aaron, Joseph, David, Mari, Jesus, etc they are all reported in the Pyramid Texts, the Book of the Dead and many other Ancient Egyptian very old texts. Only AE Hieroglyphs should be re-deciphered but this time on True scientific unbiased bases. Only then peoples will know the Truth. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are three divine divisions of the Ancient Egyptian religion which was the True peaceful (Haneef) creed of Abraham. The True AE Abraham is known in traditional Egyptology as 'god PtaH' who was reported in far pre-dynastic Hieroglyphic texts, may be much earlier and older than many peoples think. Regards, Alsaadawi

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Rosie Gamgee

If you picked up a cracker and said, "This is my body," do you think that people would think you meant it was your actual flesh and blood? It would be quite obvious to those people that you didn't mean that, unless you were crazy. If Jesus was crazy, why did nearly all His disciples sacrifice their lives for what He taught? (Oh, wait; I know! They were crazy, too.)



What is the difference?


And yet, if they did recognize a Messiah, Jesus or someone else, they would still consider themselves Jews.

Let me say for the record that this is my last post in this thread. If you want to speak to me on the subject, feel free to PM. I'm tired of the squabbling. It's getting too heated, people.

I don't think it's crazy if you understand what Christ really meant. And I really think he meant what Gwai says, that it was his body. Was Jesus crazy when he fed the five-thousand miraculously from five loaves? (or was it fifteen?). We don't know how he did it, and we don't know how a bit of bread "is his body", yet that is what is said, in his own words.

Gwai, Rosie, just you guys wait for my church history thread...

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by Rosie Gamgee

If you picked up a cracker and said, "This is my body," do you think that people would think you meant it was your actual flesh and blood? It would be quite obvious to those people that you didn't mean that, unless you were crazy. If Jesus was crazy, why did nearly all His disciples sacrifice their lives for what He taught? (Oh, wait; I know! They were crazy, too.)

There's a huge difference between what occured and picking up a cracker. The Passover was a solemn religious feast, not something to take lightly like a cracker.

What is the difference?

"When you do this, remember me" seems to indicate just "remember me on those occasions when it happens you do this." "Do this in remembrance of me" in a way consecrates the whole thing to His memory; the memory in the former is accidental, in the latter it becomes the essence of the thing.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

...and we don't know how a bit of bead "is his body"...

I would disagree, but that's a bit nuanced for this discussion.