Discussion:
Jesus Was King Tut?
Add Reply
b***@shout.net
2006-08-30 07:25:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Jesus Was King Tut?

(Conspiracy Nation, 08/30/06) -- This may not sit well. There is
persuasive evidence that Jesus, not historically present during the
time of Herod and Pontius Pilate, in fact existed centuries earlier.

Ahmed Osman, in his book, Jesus In The House Of The Pharaohs (ISBN:
1-59143-027-5), emphasizes that he approaches the subject from an
historical, not a theological, perspective.

The Bible began as an oral tradition, later written down. Further
distortion occurred due to disparate sources, for example an "Elohistic
source" and a "Jehovistic source." The Biblical narrative is therefore
confusing. Lurking within are actual happenings, hidden "between the
lines."

Usually, writes Osman, Egyptian history tends to be squeezed into a
Biblical framework. He has taken a different approach, fitting the
Bible into Egyptian history.

In 1947, the Dead Sea Scrolls, remains of an Essene library, were
found. The Scrolls are now under the control of the Israeli Antiquity
Department. For over fifty years now, most of the contents of these
Scrolls remain unpublished. Why? There is the hint of a cover-up. Could
photos of the Scrolls' contents, at least, be made available to the
public? The Israeli government has formed a committee to look into the
request.

In 1922, Howard Carter had recovered documents from the newly
discovered tomb of King Tutankhamun. Whatever those papyri had to say
is not known to us. They, like the Dead Sea Scrolls, remain closeted.
The King Tut papyri gave Carter leverage, however, when dealing with
Egyptian bureaucrats. Whatever their contents, there was apprehension
lest Carter might let such be known. (See "Curse Of King Tut,"
http://www.shout.net/~bigred/KingTut.html)

The Dead Sea Scrolls pre-date the Biblical Jesus. These Essene texts
tell of a Christ and a Christian Church dating to before 200 B.C. They
relate the story of a "Teacher of Righteousness" who had been killed by
"the Wicked Priest." The word "Essene" itself is from "Essa," the
Arabic name of Jesus.

The Jews have Jesus (Yeshu in the Talmud, also called Balaam and Ben
Pandira) as a "Nazarene" who "practised magic" in Egypt. (b. Sanh.
107b). "Nazarene" does not mean "of Nazareth" but rather means
belonging to a particular gnostic sect. Also known as Ben Pandira,
Jesus in other words was the son of Pandira, who may have been the
lover, not the husband, of Mary. According to Osman, the Rabbinical
writings nowhere place the execution of Jesus during the Herodian era.

A different author, James D. Tabor, suggests "Pandira" was actually a
Roman soldier named Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera. He may have raped
Mary, or may have been redeployed elsewhere before he could be married
to her. "Mary might well have become pregnant first, and her engagement
then subsequently arranged by the family and accepted by Joseph with
knowledge of the situation." (The Jesus Dynasty. Simon & Schuster,
2006)

But Jesus ben Pandira (son of Pandira) was, according to Osman, born
much earlier than the heretofore presumed time, thus eliminating
Pantera as the biological sire. The Gospel of Matthew (1:1) is much
truer than realized: Jesus, "the son of David, the son of Abraham" is a
lineage existing as stated, within a limited time frame. This
necessarily places the actual Jesus circa 1400 B.C.

The true story of Jesus was adapted into the later, Roman period, if
Osman's theory is correct. (Participating in the adaptation was Roman
sycophant Flavius Josephus. See "Gospel Of Titus,"
http://www.shout.net/~bigred/Titus.html) The Talmud reportedly has
neither Rome nor Pontius Pilate as the killer of Yeshua, but Pinhas, an
Israelite priest and contemporary of Moses. "Pinhas... killed him
[Jesus]." (b. Sanh. 106b) Pinhas is, in other words Phinehas, son of
Eleazar, the son of Aaron. He, therefore, is the Essene's "Wicked
Priest." In the Egyptian perspective, he is Panehesy, High Priest of
the Aten at the Amarna Temple.

In "Where Is Akhenaten?"
(http://www.shout.net/~bigred/Ankhenaten.html), Moses is identified as
Amenhotep IV, i.e. Akhenaten.

In "Mystery Of Yuya and Tuya"
(http://www.shout.net/~bigred/YuyaTuya.html), the Biblical Joseph of
the "Coat of Many Colors," sold into Egyptian slavery by his jealous
brothers, is shown to be Yuya, vizier to the Pharaoh. An obvious
connection was at first missed by Conspiracy Nation. Joseph, made
"father to Pharaoh," was in other words "father-in-law to Pharaoh,"
since his daughter Tiye married Amenhotep III.

Also in "Mystery Of Yuya and Tuya," the story of Abraham and Sarah in
Egypt was reconsidered. Isaac, Sarah's son, had been fathered by the
Pharaoh. Abraham was not Isaac's father. His real father was Tuthmosis
III, i.e., David.

The Biblical David, identified as Tuthmosis III (1490-1436 B.C.), is
derived from dwd in the Bible, which becomes twt, Tuth, in Egyptian.

Tuthmosis III marched with his army into what is today known as the
Holy Land. They carried with them an Ark, containing the image of
Tuthmosis III's "father," Amun, an Egyptian god. (The "Amen" with which
various faiths conclude their prayers is traced to the Egyptian Amun.)

Enemies of Tuthmosis III, under the King of Qadesh, were entrenched at
Har Meggiddon. There, David (Tuthmosis III) scored a brilliant
battlefield victory. The enemy retreated inside the fortress of Har
Meggiddon. A lengthy siege began.

Tuthmosis III and his guards retired to a "fortress to the east" --
Jerusalem, the "City of David." David (Tuth) purchased the threshing
floor of Mount Moriah, paying 50 shekels of silver. There he built, not
"an altar for the Lord," but a shrine for Amun-Ra, whose image was
carried in the Ark.

"Solomon," for whom there is no historical record, was great-grandson
of "David." Solomon was, in other words, Amenhotep III.

Joshua (Tutankhamun) proceeded from the conjugal union of Amun-Ra and
the consort of the Pharaoh. He is therefore, like other Pharaohs, the
"Son of God." Nefertiti, his mother, is "Mary," from the Egyptian mery,
meaning "the beloved."

Aye (Ephraim) warned Amenhotep IV (Akhenaten/Moses) about discontent
resulting from his promotion of Aten worship. Aten, a monotheistic god,
had pushed aside Amun, whose loyal followers were furious about it.
There was a plot to assassinate Akhenaten (Moses), and so he fled to
Sinai.

Tutankhamun (Yeshua, Joshua, Jesus) served as Pharaoh while his father
yet lived. Under King Tut, Amun worship was again permitted. Tut
(Jesus) hoped to gradually woo the "gentiles" to the new Aten faith.

A few years thereafter, Tutankhamun (Yeshua) journeyed to Sinai. He
hoped to persuade his father, Akhenaten (Moses) to return to Egypt. He
promoted his compromise plan to Akhenaten, whereby worship of Amun was
permitted. But upon hearing this, Pinhas (Phineas), the "Wicked
Priest," became furious. Outraged that King Tut (Jesus) had "betrayed
the faith," Pinhas, High Priest of Aten, slew or caused to be slain the
"Son of God."

Tutankhamun (Jesus) may have died at the foot of Mount Sinai, site of
today's St. Catherine monastery.

-------
Conspiracy Nation
http://www.shout.net/~bigred/cn.html
r***@gmail.com
2018-06-11 06:42:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Thank you for doing this research. Ill be discarding the Roman inclusion in this, given white people always seem to find a way to put themselves in black history. I have always thought that tut was Jesus for obvious reasons. The fall of African sovereignty, goes with both of these men.. now I just need to see where this all fits in our enslavement, how much of what Jesus said was tuts actual words.. seems we were aware of our enemies and their desire to enslave and destroy our kingdoms
Thomas Heger
2018-06-18 15:01:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by r***@gmail.com
Thank you for doing this research. Ill be discarding the Roman inclusion in this, given white people always seem to find a way to put themselves in black history. I have always thought that tut was Jesus for obvious reasons. The fall of African sovereignty, goes with both of these men.. now I just need to see where this all fits in our enslavement, how much of what Jesus said was tuts actual words.. seems we were aware of our enemies and their desire to enslave and destroy our kingdoms
No, 'Jesus' was a Greek name for a Jew, that lived near the dead sea in
what is today Jordania. The Jews in the bible were actually 'black'
people and most likely stem from what is today Ethiopia.

Tut was a Pharaoh and the Jews were slaves in Egypt. So it is unlikely,
the Greek meant Tutankhamun with 'Jesus'.

The real name of this person is not known. But the name had to be in
Aramaic, since that was the main language of that region and time.

The Amaramaic name is actually not known. What is known is the title
'mahmed', what means (in Aramaic) 'the one to be praised'.

The early Christians were actually a splinter group derived from the
Jews in the Dead Sea region called 'Essenes', to which Jesus belonged
(most likely).

Those were prosecuted by the Romans after the Council of Nicea. They
fled from Syria along the Silk Road to the town Merv in the Empire of
the Sassanides.

After the Arabs conquered the town and the Empire, they adopted the
believe system, but relocated it to the Arabian peninsula, added some
centuries and made 'Mohammed' out of 'mahmed'.


TH
KWills Shill #3
2018-06-19 09:21:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Thomas Heger
Post by r***@gmail.com
Thank you for doing this research. Ill be discarding the Roman inclusion in this, given white people always seem to find a way to put themselves in black history. I have always thought that tut was Jesus for obvious reasons. The fall of African sovereignty, goes with both of these men.. now I just need to see where this all fits in our enslavement, how much of what Jesus said was tuts actual words.. seems we were aware of our enemies and their desire to enslave and destroy our kingdoms
No, 'Jesus' was a Greek name for a Jew, that lived near the dead sea in
what is today Jordania. The Jews in the bible were actually 'black'
people and most likely stem from what is today Ethiopia.
Tut was a Pharaoh and the Jews were slaves in Egypt. So it is unlikely,
the Greek meant Tutankhamun with 'Jesus'.
As you already KNOW, the Jews were not slaves during the time of
Tutankhamun. If they ever were, and it's important to note the ONLY
source for the claim they were is the Old Testament, they would have
been there during the rein of Seqenenre Tao, Kamose, and Ahmose.
Ahmose being the Pharaoh most scholars believe would have been in
power during the exodus.
Tut was born in 1341 BCE. The exodus is supposed to have occurred
in 1450 BCE. That's 109 years between the two. If the Jews were ever
slaves in Egypt, they were long gone before Tut was around.
Post by Thomas Heger
The real name of this person is not known. But the name had to be in
Aramaic, since that was the main language of that region and time.
The Amaramaic name is actually not known. What is known is the title
'mahmed', what means (in Aramaic) 'the one to be praised'.
You keep bringing this up while KNOWING Mahmed (Mohammed) and
Jesus were separated by about 600 years.
Post by Thomas Heger
The early Christians were actually a splinter group derived from the
Jews in the Dead Sea region called 'Essenes', to which Jesus belonged
(most likely).
As I already proved, they were not. What do you hope to gain from
your flat out lying? I really want to know.
Post by Thomas Heger
Those were prosecuted by the Romans after the Council of Nicea. They
fled from Syria along the Silk Road to the town Merv in the Empire of
the Sassanides.
After the Arabs conquered the town and the Empire, they adopted the
believe system, but relocated it to the Arabian peninsula, added some
centuries and made 'Mohammed' out of 'mahmed'.
No, they did not. And you KNOW they did not. This has already
been proved.
What do you hope to gain from your lying? I really want to know.
--
Shill #3.
Los Angeles Branch.
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
Loading Image...
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
Thomas Heger
2018-06-20 17:18:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Am 19.06.2018 um 11:21 schrieb KWills Shill #3:
...
Post by KWills Shill #3
Post by Thomas Heger
Tut was a Pharaoh and the Jews were slaves in Egypt. So it is unlikely,
the Greek meant Tutankhamun with 'Jesus'.
As you already KNOW, the Jews were not slaves during the time of
Tutankhamun. If they ever were, and it's important to note the ONLY
source for the claim they were is the Old Testament, they would have
been there during the rein of Seqenenre Tao, Kamose, and Ahmose.
Ahmose being the Pharaoh most scholars believe would have been in
power during the exodus.
Tut was born in 1341 BCE. The exodus is supposed to have occurred
in 1450 BCE. That's 109 years between the two. If the Jews were ever
slaves in Egypt, they were long gone before Tut was around.
Well, yes, maybe...
Post by KWills Shill #3
Post by Thomas Heger
The real name of this person is not known. But the name had to be in
Aramaic, since that was the main language of that region and time.
The Amaramaic name is actually not known. What is known is the title
'mahmed', what means (in Aramaic) 'the one to be praised'.
You keep bringing this up while KNOWING Mahmed (Mohammed) and
Jesus were separated by about 600 years.
Well, actually I don't know.

The idea stems from a German historian and Islam scientist named
Karl-Heinz Ohlig.

He had shown in great detail, that the Islam emerged out of a certain
variant of early Christianity, which itself should be regarded as a
variant of Judaism.

The six centuries you miss are apparently added. Also the story was
relocated from the Dead Sea to the Arabian peninsula.

But the real location (of that prophet) was - in my opinion - the
ancient town 'Qumran' at the Dead Sea. There are a few reasons to think
so. E.g. there is a location mentioned called 'Lot's wife'. That is a
rock near the ancient city of Sodom (also at the Dead Sea).

In Qumran lived the Essenes, to which the person belonged, which the
Greek and Romans called 'Jesus'.

But the Romans added a few other ingredients into the mixture we call
'Christianity' now. So we now cannot see the similarities any more.

But they are there.

E.g. the Qu'ran is written in ancient Arabic, what not many can
understand. In a German translation I have the text addresses a people
called 'children of Israel'.

There are also more than a few similarities between Judaism and Islam.

This would be extremely odd, if there were no common root.
..

TH
KWills Shill #3
2018-06-21 09:38:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Thomas Heger
...
Post by KWills Shill #3
Post by Thomas Heger
Tut was a Pharaoh and the Jews were slaves in Egypt. So it is unlikely,
the Greek meant Tutankhamun with 'Jesus'.
As you already KNOW, the Jews were not slaves during the time of
Tutankhamun. If they ever were, and it's important to note the ONLY
source for the claim they were is the Old Testament, they would have
been there during the rein of Seqenenre Tao, Kamose, and Ahmose.
Ahmose being the Pharaoh most scholars believe would have been in
power during the exodus.
Tut was born in 1341 BCE. The exodus is supposed to have occurred
in 1450 BCE. That's 109 years between the two. If the Jews were ever
slaves in Egypt, they were long gone before Tut was around.
Well, yes, maybe...
Not maybe. Definitely.
Post by Thomas Heger
Post by KWills Shill #3
Post by Thomas Heger
The real name of this person is not known. But the name had to be in
Aramaic, since that was the main language of that region and time.
The Amaramaic name is actually not known. What is known is the title
'mahmed', what means (in Aramaic) 'the one to be praised'.
You keep bringing this up while KNOWING Mahmed (Mohammed) and
Jesus were separated by about 600 years.
Well, actually I don't know.
Well, actually, you do know. We've discussed this already.
Post by Thomas Heger
The idea stems from a German historian and Islam scientist named
Karl-Heinz Ohlig.
He had shown in great detail, that the Islam emerged out of a certain
variant of early Christianity, which itself should be regarded as a
variant of Judaism.
Once again, and I'll type slowly so you can keep up, Islam did NOT
emerge from any variant, sect, flavor or version of Christianity.
Post by Thomas Heger
The six centuries you miss are apparently added. Also the story was
relocated from the Dead Sea to the Arabian peninsula.
Neither of those claims are true.
Post by Thomas Heger
But the real location (of that prophet) was - in my opinion - the
ancient town 'Qumran' at the Dead Sea. There are a few reasons to think
so. E.g. there is a location mentioned called 'Lot's wife'. That is a
rock near the ancient city of Sodom (also at the Dead Sea).
Your opinions mean nothing.
Post by Thomas Heger
In Qumran lived the Essenes, to which the person belonged, which the
Greek and Romans called 'Jesus'.
But the Romans added a few other ingredients into the mixture we call
'Christianity' now. So we now cannot see the similarities any more.
But they are there.
E.g. the Qu'ran is written in ancient Arabic, what not many can
understand. In a German translation I have the text addresses a people
called 'children of Israel'.
There are also more than a few similarities between Judaism and Islam.
Islam is based on Judaism.
Post by Thomas Heger
This would be extremely odd, if there were no common root.
Yet there is NO connection between Jesus and Mohammed. They are
NOT the same person.
--
Shill #3.
Los Angeles Branch.
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
e***@hotmail.com
2018-06-21 12:13:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Thomas Heger
There are also more than a few similarities between Judaism and Islam.
Islam is based on Judaism.
Post by Thomas Heger
This would be extremely odd, if there were no common root.
Yet there is NO connection between Jesus and Mohammed. They are
NOT the same person.
******
Christianity and Islam are both based on Judaism. There’s your “common root.” Mohammed does not have to have been Jesus, any more than he had to be Joseph for him to fit elements of Judaism into Islam.
Thomas Heger
2018-06-21 16:05:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by KWills Shill #3
Post by Thomas Heger
There are also more than a few similarities between Judaism and Islam.
Islam is based on Judaism.
Post by Thomas Heger
This would be extremely odd, if there were no common root.
Yet there is NO connection between Jesus and Mohammed. They are
NOT the same person.
******
Christianity and Islam are both based on Judaism. There’s your “common root.” Mohammed does not have to have been Jesus, any more than he had to be Joseph for him to fit elements of Judaism into Islam.
The story of a) Mohammed has actually the same origin as the story about
b) Jesus, but altered in space, time and language by the Arabs in case
a) and by the Romans in case b).

The origin is the exact same myth, which has its roots in a certain form
of Judaism and stems from the Dead Sea (possibly Qumran).

From there it went to what is today Syria (after the wars of the Romans
against the Jews in Palestine).

The Greeks/Romans mixed in the Roman version of Zaroastrism and the
Arabs 'arabified' the story.

But if you would turn back the clocks to a few centuries A.C. (before
the Concil of Nicea) and compare the believes of the early
Syrian/Aramaic Christians called 'Arians' with that of the Essenes and
that with the early versions of Islam (from 7th century), you will find
many similarities.

The differences came later by e.g. Emperor Constantine and the Concil of
Nicea.

TH

Mr. Man-wai Chang
2018-06-20 17:19:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by r***@gmail.com
Thank you for doing this research. Ill be discarding the Roman inclusion in this, given white people always seem to find a way to put themselves in black history. I have always thought that tut was Jesus for obvious reasons. The fall of African sovereignty, goes with both of these men.. now I just need to see where this all fits in our enslavement, how much of what Jesus said was tuts actual words.. seems we were aware of our enemies and their desire to enslave and destroy our kingdoms
If Jesus was just a symbol...
Anyway...
Can you turn guns and stones into bread? :)
--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不賭錢! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 不求神! 請考慮綜援
(CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa
Loading...