Temples and Religion in Ancient Egypt (ASTONISHING HISTORY DOCUMENTARY)
Temples and Religion in Ancient Egypt (ASTONISHING HISTORY DOCUMENTARY) The great religion of one of the greatest and oldest civilizations on Earth ...
Truly, unless you've seen this show, not many know about the west restoring
these things in Egypt, away from much of the public's knowledge. I mean
what is the scale of restoration they're planning? But I'm not surprised
that the French took the lead. Truly it's difficult to restore the actual
pharaohship because Islam is so staunch in that part of the world, and they
generally don't allow the use of multi-god portrayal monuments for
religious purposes. Muslims seem even stricter than Jews in terms of
insisting on the non-use of carved or sculptured images that portray humans
or animals for worship! Truly, I've visited Egypt once, but didn't get to
see much in ancient terms there at all, nor did we get close to the Sphinx,
or the synagogue built in honour of the place of birth of Moses as
mentioned in the video. But we've been to a grotto church of the coptics
and a museum in Luxor. That was about it all. We also suddenly turned up on
Sinai and Mount Horeb, though, with the camels.
Unlike jews however the muslims wantonly destroy historical artifacts in truly horiffic fashion. They are indescriminate in their fanaticsm and blow up ancient Bhuddist shrines with the same callous indifference they have used on the ancient Greco-Roman ruins of Palmyra. Islam is a bloody rag when it comes to historical preservation of relics that are not Muslim.
Its poor research or just poor general knowledge in particular to refer to
the current population as being the offspring of the Egyptian ancestors.
The current population are the offspring of invaders after around 680 a.d.
during the violent spread of Islam. These were the enemies of the ancient
Egyptians and their likeness is written and depicted in many places as
proof positive of these current "asiatics" and who they truly are.
+fly4life makes more sense to me than being willing to blow yourself up and murder innocent bystanders because you believe some guy flew up to Heaven on a talking donkey.
+HNUmaker Yes they do. Instead of Heru/Horus they call him Jesus. Same exact story !2 followers/disciples etc.. Its a mix with him and his Father Asar/Osiris. They used to bring out Asars body yearly and on the third day would show him and they would eat cornbread and drink beer in remembrance of him. Familiar?
Yes. There are people worldwide who still worship the traditional Egyptian Dieties. I believe their religion is referred to as Kemetism, and there is an article on it on Wikipedia.
dont know about the eqyptians,but for a fact numerous people around the globe worship the so called god,the same gos as the mayans aztecs the templars, also in all fairness there is plenty that worship the egyptian god on a sunday
re: What Is Religion (Corey Anton & suicideforcelluloid)
The Hindu caste system was imposed by Indo-Aryan warrior priests, who did
NOT invent their system of belief in order to impose it on foreign
populations. The Sintashta culture in NW Russia reveals Hindu practices
which were already ritualized (the famous Horse sacrifice from the Rig Veda
is reflected in detail in the arrangement of Horse inhumations from
Sintashta) prior to their exportation to the south in the Bactria Margiana
Complex, further south into the Iranian plateau and still further south to
India. The reality of the discrepancy of force between the original
Siberian peoples and their subjugated populations are apotheosized in myth,
but at no point did these Hyperboreans decide to arranged a system of
belief for the purpose of subjugation (though their beliefs did serve that
purpose); they didn't have to, the domination was self evident. As a more
recent analogy look at the mongol leader Genghis Khan, who's life was
mythologized not solely out of propagandistic calculation, but because he
himself believed that he was acting out the will of the sky god.
+Anekantavad "The Aryans were not necessarily a homogeneous group, and they may have had diverse origins. Aryan-ness itself evolved over time, and with it the religious beliefs that they espoused."Yes, but the essence of the spiritual practice of the Indo Europeans is perennial, it is one which accepts the divinity of man and demands a return to knowledge. Krishna, Christ, Baldur, Serapis, these are mythological figures which accompanied the beginning of the age of Pisces and which allowed the translation of the deeper metaphysical truths contained in the symbolism of the Arian age (the age in which Hinduism came into being) for the masses of humanity. The symbolism of the Arian age used figures from the legends of the Taurean age as their symbols. The early pantheon of Hinduism come from both the Indo-European and Indus Valley Taurean age but the larger portion of the Gods came from the Indo-European source. Yes it all develops, and the metaphysical essence of Hinduism is Perennial, not Aryan, but the beginnings of Hinduism were pretty Aryan flavored. " it is inaccurate to describe the ancient Indoeuropeans as Hindus"Perhaps, since the Hindu religion we are familiar with incorporates dialectical additions influenced by its South Asian antithesis (in the Hegelian sense), but it does seem that the religion of the writers of the Rig Veda was an Indoeuropean one. Rigveda 9:73:5 "O'er Sire and Mother they have roared in unison bright with the verse of praise, burning up riteless men, Blowing away with supernatural might from earth and from the heavens the swarthy skin which Indra hates. " So you could say that these men were not Hindu, but it would be a semantic issue. What you then go on to describe is a means whereby the ethnic elite can pit other ethic groups against each other. Divide and conquer, "The caste system was fluid enough in its origins to enable indigenous groups to claim high-caste status, provided they were good enough fighters" Rome would offer land and position to the Germanic Chiefs which would fight against other Germanic enemies of Rome (and why not? if you're a German at the time, you were probably planning on going to war with them any way)."Hinduism is inextricable from caste" Historically, Hinduism has been developing in conjunction with a caste system, but the caste system is the natural outgrowth of the spiritual orientation, primarily, of the initial conquering population, who already had many of the core spiritual inclinations that Hinduism carries forward. The system was intentionally created by the Aryans with the help of opportunistic South Asians, but the core of the belief structure which was used to justify it had already been practiced by the Aryans for thousands of years; it was not a belief structure created in order to impose the caste system. That would be putting the cart before the horse.
Yes and no. The Aryans were not necessarily a homogeneous group, and they may have had diverse origins. Aryan-ness itself evolved over time, and with it the religious beliefs that they espoused.For a contemporary comparison, the Dutch/French/German settlers who eventually became the Afrikaners espoused the Christian faith long before their arrival in Africa, and christianity originally had no overt racial undertones. This did not, however, prevent the Afrikaner religious leadership from becoming one of the pillars of the apartheid structure. And not merely a pillar; an actual justification for it - found in a reading of the Old Testament.Hinduism is a synthesis of both Aryan and indigenous forms of worship and belief and social practice, and IMO it is inaccurate to describe the ancient Indoeuropeans as Hindus. It was the cross-fertilization of the aryans with the non-Aryans that produced Hinduism. Furthermore, while Aryan-ness is traceable to the Central Asian steppe, the categorization of caste into racial groups is dodgy, especially in the case of those who wielded temporal power: the kshatriya. The caste system was fluid enough in its origins to enable indigenous groups to claim high-caste status, provided they were good enough fighters. A more recent case is the Rajputs of the Northwest. They arrived in India in the historical period, yet they are almost stereotypically ksatriya, and upper-caste.Hinduism is inextricable from caste, and it's hard not to see caste as a deliberate creation.
The masses in South Africa were largely immigrants from other African
nations seeking a better life. When apartheid fell the economy fell with
it. Blacks in South Africa under apartheid were on average in a better
economic position than they are now, despite their new found political
power.
That's debatable, as is the contention that black S Africans are immigrants. Many aren't indigenous to the region, but only in the sense that their ancestors only arrived in what became S Africa circa 1700.
your conspiracy angle is most apt. the cycle of reinvention is also spot on.
also, you referenced my favourite verse: c.9 v26 which i love so much its
memorised.
i agree that 'we are Arjuna' but i don't think you can boil the implication
of his relationship with Krishna down to a call to 'love the Other', since
in the broader philosophy of hinduism this division is illusory.
The dual/non-dual bit in Hinduism is a tricky thing, isn't it? Love in and of itself is a form of drawing something else to oneself (or vice-versa), but that presupposes there is something else to draw to oneself. Unless of course, the "other" is simply that part of oneself that one has ceased to identify with, in which case there is no absolute Other to speak of. It's just the usual illusion of nonunity.Interestingly, the non-Vaishnava traditions are (seemingly) non-dualist even as they are desitic. Shaivism has powerful elements of Siva as the "awesome and awe-inspiring Other", but the overall "feel" of Shaivism is non-dual. Krishna might be lovable and passionately desirous of reuinion with us, while Siva is "within" us the same way as one could say Dionysus was. Duality that isn't duality at all.:-)
I believe you could go on for hours :P. good stuff. i think the distinction
between esoteric and exoteric as it functions conspiratorially within
religion. is fascinating .
Machiavelli criticized Christianity for various reasons and thought that
politics (or public ethics) is fundamentally
incompatible with Christian ethics. His message was that politics when
viewed from within the confines of a Christian Weltanschauung - is by nature
always immoral. Hence, he does not separate politics and morality, but
politics and Christian morality.
As is commonly known, Machiavelli harked back to ancient Rome and its
practices and in general had a more positive view of paganism for the
political class. Consider as well that one of the leading political
influences in America has been the work of Leo Strauss・another, more recent
fan of ancient politics. He has been blamed for influencing much of the
neo-con movement and for supporting the ideology of beneficial dictators
promoting 'noble lies". i realize much controversy surrounds such
characterizations of Strauss and i do not fully endorse them (especially
the stronger claims that he would endorse a pagan-facism, and who does that
remind us of?) In Persecution and the Art of Writing, Strauss argues that
serious writers write esoterically; for the reader with eyes to see and
ears to hear beneath multiple layers. The same was true of politics for
him. One must be close or proximate to power in order to really claim any
knowledge of said power and thusly there was a serious structural issue
with the way power operated --namely it was forced to do so with subterfuge
and real politik.
One of the more curious examples of the esoteric and exoteric distinction
of late (and how the little ppl are to decipher the two) was the
presentation of George W. Bush (jr) with 'the scroll of bush' given to him
in 2008 in Israel on behalf of the New Jewish Congress, The Sanhedrin, and
The Holy Temple and Temple Mount Movements. Good boy Bush, Good boy lol.
The interesting thing is that it refers to Bush as "Esteemed Mr. George W.
Bush, the Chief Prince of Meshech and Tubal (Ezekiel 38:1), Leader of the
West!"
this is of course a direct reference to Gog of the land of Magog. Now as it
happens Bush's father while uncontroversially a member of skull and bones
and had allegedly taken the name magog・the source of this last bit may be
contested but has been around for quite some time before Bush jr was
honored by his Israeli scroll. the bush of scroll by the way is an
uncontested document, nothing tin-foil hat about it--you can read it on
their (the temple institute) website.
so whats the deal? does Bush really think he is enacting some biblical
prophecy in a literal Christian sense that most believers would agree with?
i don't think so. however back to the esoteric and exoteric distintion; we
have two agendas or two ways of reading the same thing or two blueprints
for our future, one script we the masses read from and another for the
EL-ect, so it seems to me. However I don't think its just two scripts
either and for the elite there is surely scripts within scripts no doubt.
Imo anyway;-)
Hence the fact that Krishna urges Arjuna on to mayhem and an unjustifiable war with his teachers and relatives. There's morality, and then there's duty. Duty always comes first :-)
So, nowadays religion is a sort of inertia? A number of people
(theologians, apologists, priests) have to keep it up amidst the masses to
make their living.
Humans are the only ones in the animal world who (because of their very
complex brain) have achieved transcendency on top of their physical bodies.
Religion exploits that feature of the human mind.
"Uh uh um... [rapid stumbling flurry of words]... uh um... uh uh um..."
Jesus - dude should put down the bong before he speaks. Learn to pause
between ideas without having to fill the gap with 'uh uh um'. Sounds like
an excited, stoned nerd and it robs his message of power.
+Ted Mishler Fair enough. I understand that he reaches his audience - us conspiracy nuts, as they call us - but I wish he would speak more eloquently in order to pass his message on to other more mainstream audiences who would see his approach, at best, as indicative of unprofessionalism.
Abraham was a shemite from tha line of noahs son shem indeed he was a
chaldean etc there was many shemites who were in many lands & religions
infact its tha other way around tha babylonians etc got there culture way
of life from tha 1st ancients which were noah n before him... so right
there we know babylonians were after tha 1st ppl of Adam... Still love tha
vid thats tha only false thing that was stated peace... stay lifted.
+Yahubakkuk Vibrations and there's more to it than that. The Sumerian tablets plainly state that Noah was born here on earth but was actually 1/2 human and 1/2 the 'people who came to earth'. Their alien society gave us a brisk start if we can maintain it, and I'm not so sure our society isn't still degenerating since most of them left. Looking back at the old Sumerian documentation, it's clear that all the early movers and shakers were full-breed Anunnaki and we were purpose-bred to be their slaves. The earth generals were human but the rulers, the 1st ancients you refer to, were Anunnaki. Much later than early man, the Adam-class of people were genetically engineered to rule and teach because their previously created humans, referred to as the 'black-haired people', couldn't even learn how to govern themselves or learn agriculture, and had to be updated in order that the growing societies could drop their reliance on the hunter-gatherers. If you'd like to collaborate, find me on facebook :)
Drug Use in Early Christianity & Ancient Religion: Aeon Byte Gnostic Radio
INTERVIEW STARTS AT 24:00. The use of cannabis was widespread in the pre and early Christian world. Cannabis cults dressed in various mythologies ...