Re: The Risen Christ
- Hi Dottie,
>I believe that Ralph Ellis has been influenced by Osman's writings,
> Hi Keith,
> The book I was reading is called Christianity ~ An Ancient Egpytian
> Religion by Ahmed Osman.
>I can see how it might be so. But if I'm reading Ellis correctly, the
> I'll give you the back cover:
> "In Christianity: an Ancient Egyptian Religion author Osman contends
> that the roots of Christian belief spring not from Judaea but from
> Egypt. He compares the chronology of the Old Testament and its
> factual content with ancient Egyptian records to show that the major
> characters of the Hebrew scriptures - including Solomon, David,
> Moses, and Joshua - are based on Egyptian historical figures. He
> further suggests that not only were these personalities and the
> stories associated with them cultivated on the banks of the Nile,
> but the major tents of Christian belief - the One God, the Trinity,
> the hierarchy of heaven, life after death, adn the virgin birth -
> are all Egyptian in origin. He likewise provides a convincing
> argument that Jesus himself came out of Egypt.
> With the help of modern archaeological findings, Osman shows that
> Christinanity survived as an Egyptian mystery cult until the fourth
> century A.D., when the Romans embarked on a mission of suppression
> and persecution. In A.D. 391 the Roman - appointed Bishop Theophilus
> led a mob into the Serapeum quarter of Alexandria and the burned
> Alexandrian library, destroying all records of the true Egyptian
> roots of Christianity. The Roman's version of Christianity,
> manufactutred to maintain political power, claimed that Christianity
> originated in Judaea. In Christianity: An Ancient Egyptian Religion
> Osman restores Egypt to its rightful place in the history of
> So, of course I bought the book from the title and also the back
> page. I had hoped, although I immediately saw a 'this is that' type
> of formula that didn't include the ongoing stream of Egyptian
> mysterires, rather a 'they stole it', that he would have some clues
> within that would serve my ongoing search. However there is so much
> conjecture and opinion that all I am reading is his understanding
> according to his own personal likes and dislikes. It's a polemical
> paper agains the Christianity.
core point is that the northern Egyptians were ancestors of the later
Jews, so there is in fact a continuation of the Egyptian traditions
into the Hebriac. But the key problem is that the Judiac elders for
seem reason wanted to deny the Egyptian past of their people in it's
fullness as rulers for a period in northern Egypt. This didn't seem a
problem for Jesus, who may have had links to Egypt.
>It maybe that this alleged denial on the part of the Jews was for
> On the one hand Rudolf Steiner speaks of our time as a
> recapitualation of the Egyptian epoch. And so I can get how one will
> find these things of interest. But there's no root accept 'they
> stole and they lied' etc. So the book has turned out to be just
> about useless to me unfortunately.
political reasons. This did not stymie the spirituality of the Jews,
but it may have limited their outlook whilst in the quest for a
distinct political and cultural identity in the region.
I think the logic that underlies this potential tension between
ancient Egypt and Israel as a result of the Exodus event/s is an
assertion of Jewish uniqueness and authority, which relates in quality
or likeness to the Pharaonic ideals.
>I don't know Ralph Ellis, but he seems to me to be free in his
> In regards to knowing if Christ came down is a spiritual science
> work Keith. It's easy to say 'I can't know this' and 'you all have
> to take it on faith' but that would not be the hard answer. The hard
> answer comes from one's own inner work even if it begins from a
> skeptical point of view. Even in being skeptical one has to find a
> way to get the antipathies and the sympathies out of the way if one
> wants to find a truth. And the book The Philosophy of Freedom speaks
> directly to the concept of doing this. It is an arguement with
> oneself and what they believe and why they believe and is it free,
> and what is freedom in thinking.
thinking, not bound by conventions, assumptions or rules absolutely.
He even states that his technique is basically "lateral thinking". The
sciences/philosophy of rationality and logic has long been discussed
and studied as to how to think freely, and I'm fairly confident he
demonstrates rational and free thinking.
The hard path is developing an understanding of the information and
experiences that comes your way. Inner work has many facets in this,
and should be free to take the path it chooses, whatever that is and
wherever it goes too.
> I can say I experienced two direct scenes consciously regarding to
> Golgotha. One of them on the cruxifixion and the other on the night
> of the Transfiguration. These were in movie reel format so it was
> like watching a scene that had occurred. And I can know that it was
> by Grace, by Christ, I was able to see these two things. I mean I
> can say by Christ, as He is connected to the whole. And so for me
> what it has produced is this working towards being a good human
> If you want to know the truth of Christ and the ongoing path one has
> to have a little trust or openess that it might be true that He did
> come down here to Earth. If one goes in with the 'prove it to me I
> don't think it happened' I don't think it works that well. One has
> to have a little bit of being open to the possibility. And just that
> little bit along with looking to free ones thinking from
> preconcieved ideas makes a world of difference on the path to
> finding a truth.
> All good things,
- --- kmlightseeker <kmlightseeker@...> wrote:
> I said:Actually, I wasn't trying to be incorrect, but was
> > Some corrections (Assuming you didn't mean the
> above figures to be
> > incorrect :) [Ok, i'm guessing the latter is more
> likely, but I think
> > the correct representations need to be made here.
> :) ]):
> I was remiss in mentioning that the latter
> possibility was that Frank
> was intentionally being incorrect. Sorry about that.
using Occram's Razor method, just counting the
letters, therefore fts=3. But in any which way, I see
a problem because of different languages. Numerology
may work in Hebrew, fe, but when translated into a
different language, it becomes nonsense (I assume).
But if something is true, it must be so in any
language - a concept, for example. Can a concept be
Frank Thomas Smith
Finding fabulous fares is fun.
Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel bargains.