Hi fellow Steemians,
This is something that I find terribly important to share. Religion has at times fascinated me, at times puzzled me; both intrigued me and dismayed me. Both as a child, and for my entire adult life, this puzzle which is organized religion has really challenged my intellect, my beliefs, and even my faith.
Why do the Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam, all disagree with and contradict one another, if they all espouse the same belief in the same God?
Why all the countless wars, the hatred, the violence? Why, if Yahweh, God or Allah, depending on your language, religion, and culture of birth, all reference the same Cosmic Entity of Love, Light and Truth; do all these sectarian beliefs continue to divide us?
Well, I decided to find some answers to these questions. May the truth forever illuminate your lives.
Uncovering the History of the Ancient Israelites – The True Identity of the Biblical Patriarchs: The Hyksos Pharaohs of Lower Egypt.
Quoting from the BBC
The history of the Jewish people begins in Bronze Age times in the Middle East when God promised a nomad leader called Abram that he would be the father of a great people if he did as God told him. Jews regard Abraham (as he was later called) as the first Patriarch of the Jewish people.
So where did Abraham come from in the Bible?
Quoting from Slate
There's only one problem: The Bible doesn't say where Abraham was born. Abraham first appears in the Bible in Genesis 11:27, which says that Terah, a descendant of Noah's son Shem, begets three children: Abram, Nahor, and Haran. (Abraham is called Abram at the moment, which means "the father is exalted."
As the text makes clear, Terah and his family were pastoral nomads, wandering from place to place for varying periods of time. So, it's not inconceivable that Abraham and even Nahor might have been born someplace else. But where? And where was this place called Ur of the Chaldeans?
The answer is: We don't know. Despite two centuries of searching, there is no archaeological evidence that the events in the first five books of the Bible ever took place. As a result, everything on this question is conjecture.
The problem with viewing religion through a child’s eyes and child’s stories.
This is where I would like to bring you, the reader, in on a little-known secret.
The Slate article is a perfect introduction to this topic of who Abraham was, because it reflects, in my opinion, the pervasiveness of the greatest historical fallacy of the last 2000+ years.
These myths- created to initiate the Children of God into the various cults of the ages, hundreds of years after the historical facts - which surround the characters from the Bible are quite literally responsible for the sectarianism that has plagued our world and the lives of billions of people around the world for thousands of years.
The truth is, all monotheists follow the exact same God that was revealed by Abraham.
The. Exact. Same. God.
As our species begins to mature from the level of consciousness of a child, fighting amongst ourselves with ‘‘ That’s mine! You can’t have it! ’’ and ‘‘ I’m right and you’re wrong because my daddy said so!’’ kinds of justifications, it’s time to take a new look at our most ‘cherished’ beliefs (loved by some, despised by others, and almost always misunderstood and misrepresented in all the theological and philosophical debates of the ages)
This is about the story of the religious followers of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, and why they all fundamentally disagree about the One True Religion
It was all based on a misunderstanding.
A misunderstanding that has been purposefully exaggerated over the last two thousand years, in order to create divisions amongst the flocks of sheep that fill the pews of the various Synagogues, Churches and Mosques, and to concentrate political power into the hands of the Great Manipulators of history, the clergymen, and their desire to control the world, through false promises, cheap lies, and callous deceit…
Before I go in too deep, I would just like to say that I fundamentally and unequivocally have faith in the objective existence of a Higher Power.
But I believe this Higher Power is best contemplated through the Heart and Spirit, and so I choose to use my head for what it was best designed to do: Perceiving the Reality of the Physical World.
Here is the real story of the Biblical Patriarchs
But before we can go into that, a brief timeline to try and get an idea of the time and place in which all of this was happening.
Quoting from Wikipedia
Egyptian civilization followed prehistoric Egypt and coalesced around 3150 BC (according to conventional Egyptian chronology) with the political unification of Upper and Lower Egypt under Menes. The history of ancient Egypt occurred as a series of stable kingdoms, separated by periods of relative instability known as Intermediate Periods.
- 2686-2181 BC - The Old Kingdom of the Early Bronze Age
- 2181-2055 BC - The First Intermediate Period.
- 2055-1650 BC - The Middle Kingdom of the Middle Bronze Age.
- 1650-1550 BC - The Second Intermediate Period.
- 1550-1069 BC - The New Kingdom of the Late Bronze Age.
2055BC-1650BC: The Middle Kingdom Period
During this period, Egyptian culture flourished. Politically stable, this unified Egypt was certainly the superpower of its day. No civilization in the Middle East could even compare.
The stories that are told through the Jewish Bible all begin with a socio-political shift that took place at the end of the Middle Kingdom.
By this time, Egypt had been basking in a Golden Age that had spanned over 400 years, having enjoyed the fruits of many technological revolutions such as the irrigation of Fayoum and other farming methods, quarrying and stone-cutting, as well as numerous achievements in the arts and aesthetics.
The apparent Golden Age came to an untimely end when the 13th Dynasty petered out of existence due to lack of any heirs. The 14th Dynasty which took its place was politically much less stable and could do nothing to stop a migrating horde of horse and chariot riders from the Negev Desert (The Middle East) equipped with composite bows from invading all of Lower Egypt (The Northern Part), and establishing a concurrent Pharaonic Kingdom with a capital at Avaris.
This shift marks the beginning of the Hyksos Rule of Lower Egypt and the beginning of the Second Intermediary Period.
Now what I am about to reveal is of tremendous historical importance.
This could very well be one of the biggest secrets in History.
And though there still exists much controversy and uncertainty surrounding the story of the Hyksos, careful analysis of the records indeed reveals the true story of their rule over Lower Egypt and the Prophetic Revelations of Abraham.
Quoting from Ralph Ellis
The five books of Moses, as these texts are sometimes known, are simply the story of a royal bloodline, but it is a story that has branched off in different eras and into slightly different sects.
This most ancient of stories first divided in Babylon in about the 6th century BC and the Torah was founded; the story divided again in the first century AD, forming the Bible; and it branched off once more in the sixth century AD and the Koran evolved.
So who were the Hyksos?
A quick Wikipedia glance will tell us what mainstream Egyptologists have advanced in their conventional and academic theories:
The Greek name "Hyksos" was coined by Manetho to identify the Fifteenth Dynasty of Asiatic rulers of northern Egypt. In Egyptian Hyksos means "ruler(s) of foreign countries", however, Josephus mistranslated Hyksos as "Shepherd Kings".
Though there exist first century accounts about the etymological origins of the Greek word Hyksos, the supposed academic authorities have almost unanimously decided to disagree with it.
They claim that the Hebrew Roman-Jewish historian Josephus, who provided invaluable historical analysis and accounts of almost every single major event in Antiquity, was simply mistaken about everything he ever wrote about; and that his incredibly astute observations (which can be verified in many other texts and writings that predated his life) should be entirely dismissed.
‘ Nice ’ – Hae-Joo
The Academicians’ Meaning of the Word Hyksos
The established academics- whose careers are staked in perpetuating meaningless narratives about Ancient Egyptian culture- claim the word Hyksos comes from the Egyptian Hekau Khaswet, meaning ‘Rulers of foreign lands’.
The earliest case I was able to find of someone refuting Josephus and Manetho’s grasp of the Ancient Egyptian language comes from George Steindorff in the 1940s, in his work When Egypt Ruled the East, page 24.
Supposedly, the chief theorist advancing this idea today would be Israel Finkelstein, Professor of the Archeology of Israel from the University of Tel Aviv. He is hailed as an authority figure on the subject.
His rationale for this translation can be found in his work The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts, on page 54.
They justify their assertion for this meaning of Hyksos by saying they found Hekau Khaswet in earlier documents. Earlier documents that would predate the use of the word Hyksos by 500 years or more (the word Hyksos is of course a Greek transliteration of an Egyptian word that was used in Ptolemaic Egypt.)
According to their findings, Hekau Khaswet was used to refer to Nubian and Canaanite chieftains hundreds of years before the 2nd Intermediary Period. However, once you look at the opposing argument, as first elaborated in the 1st century AD by Josephus, I hope you will take pause and try to make up your own mind about this.
Personally, after looking at the evidence, I really would have to be convinced with a stronger argument than ‘look, the words look the same, so they must be the same word’. This is intellectual plausible, but we should be cautious before jumping to conclusions.
Ancient Egyptian as we know it was recorded in Hyeroglyphics, stone-graved characters that required tremendous skill to write, and were incredibly time-and-resource-intensive to produce. These would have been designed to withstand the calamities experienced by the Kingdom during periods of major social upheaval, and even in extremis, to outlast Egyptian civilization itself.
At the time, however, there probably would have co-existed one, if not several scripts to be used in the various distinct regions of the Kingdom, which would have been used for more common, every-day writing and transcribing.
These scripts would have resembled other Semitic scripts (like an ancient ancestor of the more modern Hebrew and Arabic scripts).
In point of fact, the Egyptian language probably would have most-likely comprised several dialects and patois, and would have been an incredibly dynamic and evolving, living language.
This already makes the leading Egyptologists' argument about the near-certainty of the meaning of the word Hyksos (which comes to us written in Greek alphabet) - as being related to the word Hekau Khaswet (which we only find in Hyeroglyphic form) - as it was understood and employed during Ptolemaic times; an uncertain proposition at best.
Just to illustrate this point with a modern example:
In the English language, the words sensitive and sensible both have very different meanings. However, the French word ‘sensible’, which is where the English word ‘sensible’ came from, has the meaning of the English word ‘sensitive’. Thus, a French person who did not know the intricacies of the English language, might thus say of his heart-broken friend, ‘Hee iz veh-ree sen-si-bul’, implying to his English-speaking audience that he thought his heart-broken friend was being very logical in his heart-broken state, and thus miscommunicating the meaning that his friend was particularly vulnerable to taking his break-up with his girlfriend pretty hard.
This is what is known as a faux-ami, a ‘false-friend’. Just because words look or sound very similar does not mean that their meaning and their usage were the same, especially when looking at extensive periods of time, like say, hundreds of years.
The meaning of words and their usage actually change pretty quickly, even though they may have evolved from a common source.
With this example in mind, try to understand that identifying certain words recorded in different written systems, and in different periods of time, is at the very least, an incredibly complex and arduous task to accomplish, and we must remain honest about the uncertainty that these initiatives necessarily preclude.
Without further context to try and understand how these words may have evolved, these kinds of hypotheses remain speculatory in nature.
We do have, luckily, some added context, which comes to us through the writings of Josephus, who himself received his information from historical character Manetho, the High-Priest of Heliopolis and Chief Historian of Ancient Egyptian culture and history who lived during Egypt's Ptolemaic period, who's writings were lost to the ashes and dust of History.
The fact that Jewish modern historians dispel such as a source because it doesn't readily match their pre-conceived notions of how they think history should be, should also add to our skepticism if we are to be intellectual honest in our quest for true, reliable knowledge.
Regarding these academics' assertion that the word Hyksos ’definitively’ means ‘Foreign Ruler’ just because there was a much earlier word that kinda resembled the word Hyksos, which is already a transliteration of an Egyptian word into written Greek, should not be enough evidence to convince a critical and open-minded person that this is so beyond the shadow of a doubt.
Language is much trickier than that.
Meaning is all about the nuance and connotation that certain words have over others, and we choose certain words because they have a clear and distinct meaning in our parlance that may, hundreds of years later, completely change, even if we are still talking about the same word.
The fact that translating Hyksos as ‘Shepherd King’ as opposed to ‘Foreign Ruler’ would completely change the way the Jewish faith is perceived and understood in our modern world, and that most scholars who happily contradict Manetho and Josephus are in fact Jewish, means we should at least be somewhat sceptical of simple dismissals of interesting theories, at least until we take a look at the actual evidence.
That’s why I would like to present to you an argument that; at least IMHO, makes a lot more sense than the ‘foreign ruler’ meaning, because it is rooted in 2000 years of established history and it also takes into consideration the high level of intelligence of the Ancient Egyptians, who were the most advanced group of human beings to ever develop a civilization that has thus-far endured the test of time, and plead you to refrain from merely seeking to find plausible-sounding yet overly-simplistic ways to dismiss and rationalize away facts that are too strange to be mere coincidence, and even point to a much larger picture that has been missing from our secular quest to unearth the origins of a group of mythological wandering desert-herdsmen.
If there is indeed a bigger picture that has been missing this entire time that we can confirm in the historical record; and we have just been unaware of its existence this entire time; due to being collectively and historically too uneducated and dependent on the opinions and words of the 'ever-so benevolent and benign' priests; who have historically wielded immeasurable power and influence over the masses of humanity; and who themselves may or may not even be familiar with the actual evidence, then we must surely take a look at this 'new evidence' and re-assess what we have been ignorant of up-until-now.
The Real Meaning of the Word Hyksos
These short passages are taken from Ralph Ellis’ Jesus, Last of the Pharaohs, which argues against the ‘foreign leader’ hypothesis.
Manetho, as quoted by Josephus, says that the patriarchs of the Jewish people were both shepherds and captives. This account, and the parallel record in Genesis and Exodus, forms the basis of the standard story-line with which we are all familiar. It is from these roots that we now have the folk-tale of the poor Israelite shepherds being captives in a foreign land where, as slaves, they had to make bricks for the nasty and brutal Egyptians.
Finally, after many generations, their great leader, Moses, came to the rescue and initiated the great exodus of the Jewish nation, from slavery in Egypt to their promised land- Israel. Northwards and eastwards they fled, as poor and starving wretches, up into Israel and the city of Jerusalem.
Unfortunately, that perception is pure nonsense; it is just a story for the children. The real biblical story is far more interesting, much more subtle and a lot more important than that.
Here, Ellis offers incredibly insightful analysis.
In his book, he shows how Josephus offers us an incredibly pertinent part of the story regarding the origins of the ‘captive’ theory for the Israelites; which he gets from Manetho.
Josephus described the Jews as being captives in Egypt, as does the Bible. He then gave the derivation of the Egyptian word for this term, although it seems that he missed some huge ramifications in doing so, for he made no mention of the following coincidence.
The Egyptian word from which ‘captive’ is derived is known as hyk. However, Manetho, through Josephus, explained that hyk has two meanings in Egyptian, depending on how it was pronounced. If the word is aspirated as the rapid sounding word ‘hik’ (as in tick), the result is the traditional word ‘captive’.
But if the word is given a longer, more rounded sound, the resulting word hyk (as in bike) means ‘king’ instead.
This is confirmed by the modern translations of Egyptian in which the word hyk can be seen either as being a ‘ruler of a pastoral people’ or a ‘prisoner of war’.
The inference is quite plain: there are two meanings to this word and they have been interpreted quite differently in the disparate disciplines of history and theology – each to suit their own story. The historians choose the term ‘Shepherd King’, because they are dealing with a lineage of pharaohs and the word ‘king’ fits their story rather well.
The religious texts are not so comfortable with this notion, they wish to portray a pastoral tale of simple folk, so they choose the term ‘captive shepherds’.
In the book, Ellis relays to us Jospehus' very interesting story about the origins of this ‘captive’ theory for the Israelites; a story which he again took from the Egyptian historian, Manetho.
Even if the Old Testament had taken up the term ‘ruler of a pastoral people’ (king of Shepherds), this would not have assisted their cause in the portrayal of a tribal people. For the term Hyksos does not refer to any old tribal leader, but to a very specific line of kings. In this new interpretation, Abraham would not just have been a minor Asiatic king, controlling some of the wastelands bordering the Negev desert, with a couple of thousand subjects and a few starving sheep No; the problem with this alternative interpretation is that the word Hyk is associated with a specific line of kings, the Hyksos or Shepherd Kings; pharaohs of Lower Egypt.
Historians usually describe the Hyksos as Semitic invaders from Palestine and Syria, who conquered Egypt in the early seventeeth century BC. They are said to have taken Memphis at first and then established a capital at Avaris, a place historians tentatively identify as the city later known as Pi-Ramesse. This in turn is identified as the biblical city of Ramesses.
The military superiority of the Hyksos and their followers can, in part, be attributed to their use of cavalry, the horse having been previously unknown in Egypt. They are said to have established a kingdom on the northeast border of the Nile Delta, leaving the territory to the north of Memphis to the remaining nobility of the indigenous sixteenth dynasty. It is thought that these northern princes were probably subservient to the Hyksos. To the south, an independent Egyptian seventeenth dynasty ruled the territory between Elephantine and Abydos, with their capital at Thebes.
The Hyksos are said to have ruled their northern Egyptian kingdom (Lower Egypt) from 1680s to 1560s BC. They were finally driven out of the country by a nationalistic revolt by the vassal princes of the Nile Delta and Upper Egypt, under Ahmose I, who was the founder of the eighteenth dynasty.
Little archeological evidence of the Hyksos kingdom has been found, but fragments of pottery and sculpture dating from this period suggest that the Hyksos kings used Egyptian customs and names As I have indicated, Egyptologists originally interpreted the word Hyksos as meaning ‘Shepherd Kings’, but it has also been suggested that the name means ‘Foreign Rulers’.
Ellis' concludes with elegance:
As the former appellation seems to be meaningless, white the latter apparently has obvious relevance for an invasion of rulers from Palestine, historians have recently gravitated towards the term ‘Foreign Ruler’ as an explanation for the title Hyksos. However, it is my contention that they are mistaken, as the hieroglyph used to denote hyk – the disputed term for shepherd – is actually the shepherd’s crook.
Thus, it is more than likely that the true translation for Hyksos is ‘Shepherd King’. What is required, and what the historians have not previously had, is a convincing explanation as to why the term ‘shepherd’ was used by this line of rulers.
You can of course read all of these wonderfully well-written points, convincing arguments and compelling analyses for yourself in Ellis' book: Jesus, Last of the Pharaohs
I think that this academic debate about the meaning of the word Hyksos, especially in the way that arguments are made in favor of one translation without referencing the actual Hyeroglyphic writing, is in it of itself, a kind of obfuscation of the facts; made to perpetuate what is probably one of the longest on-going cover-ups in human history.
Make-Up Your Own Mind About It.
Of course, I hope all of you wonderful readers, who deserve 10 Gold Stars and 50 Brownie Points for having made it this far, will make up your own mind about this.
In any case, if this theory is true, and everything in the historical record does seem to confirm it, then our collective understanding of religion has been dead wrong for a very long time.
My gut tells me this knowledge never really went away, it was just hidden and kept very carefully where the mass of humanity would never get its hands on it.
The original Freemasons must have definitely known about this.
Though it has remained a complete secret in our societies, and attempts to bring this information to light have been met with fierce opposition from the established religious institutions that emerged to control the masses of ignorant people who had been cut off from their Ancient Past and History, it does seems undeniable in this day and age that there exists a clear pathway to bridge the 'intellectual' gap between the ‘Bible story’ of Abraham and his descendants (meant to control people as if they were children to be guided by the benign patriarchal figure that are these organized religious institutions) , and to finally tie together these mythological stories with the broader historical context from which they came.
Indeed, it is my hope that we could draw a clear line through Abraham to Jesus, and possibly even figure out the truth about the Prophet Muhammad and what Islam has to do with this epic story.
What will become evident, is that in 3000 years, nothing has really changed since Abraham's Revelations.
The old secret orders of Egypt that created religion as an attempt to understand the vast and infinite mysteries of our Universe, and the treasure troves of knowledge that were once contained within the Ancient World’s many Mystery Schools, still exist today, and indeed are still actively being used to rule the world and control humanity by those who would pretend to have a Divine Right of Rule, a concept that was invented by Abraham.
So many mysteries to explore and figure out, and I can’t wait to get right down to it.
For future pieces to be shared on Steemit, and in my own personal life, I have a burning desire to attempt to highlight the extreme significance of this ancient knowledge, with the aim of spreading awareness and wisdom among all my fellow Brothers and Sisters both here on Steemit, and in my own adventure through life in the 'real' world.
In my next piece on this most fascinating of topics, I’m hoping to purely write about the historical and mythological Abraham, and try and learn everything we can from this most fascinating of characters.
Stay tuned guys!
If this piece resonated with you, please upvote, comment, and follow me on this epic crusade for truth and enlightenment. I really want to hear the Steemit community’s thoughts on this idea of the Biblical Characters being actually Royalty as opposed to mere Desert Nomadic Sheperdsmen.
I know on some level it makes sense, but looking at religion with the eyes of adults as opposed to the eyes of children, which is when we are taught all of these stories and taught to believe them unquestioningly, opens up a bigger can of worms than it actually answers.
Who were these pharaohs? What is the significance of their teachings? Is what they taught false? Or is there an incredible hidden power in these stories that if we can decipher it and comprehend it, will open our eyes to so much more wisdom and knowledge than we ever could have imagined…
Please get involved, as this is not a one-way monologue of someone telling you what to believe. These are all open-ended questions that deserve open-ended answers, and I would really love to start seeing people thinking about the questions as we all collectively start to make new sense out of these old stories
Thanks so much for reading,
Peace and Love,