Science and Technology news... :: View topic - Temple complex dedicated to Egyptian cult of Isis and Osiris

chazwin · Guest

On Oct 17, 3:33 pm, David <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote]by Diana Stoykovahttp://international.ibox.bg/news/id_1100761771

"Archaeologists Discover an Ancient Egyptian
Temple near Pomorie"

David Christainsen
[/quote]
Typical poor reporting. No temple of Isis and Osiris in the second
century CE was likely to have been "Egyptian" any more than a
CHristian temple made today would have to be described as "Greek".

Many of the gods who may have had their greatest expression were found
throughout the Roman empire, this does not make them "Egyptian"

David · Guest

On Oct 27, 1:06 pm, chazwin <chazwy...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 17, 3:33 pm, David <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:

by Diana Stoykovahttp://international.ibox.bg/news/id_1100761771

"Archaeologists Discover an Ancient Egyptian
Temple near Pomorie"

David Christainsen

Typical poor reporting. No temple of Isis and Osiris in the second
century CE was likely to have been "Egyptian" any more than a
CHristian temple made today would have to be described as "Greek".

Many of the gods who may have had their greatest expression were found
throughout the Roman empire, this does not make them "Egyptian"
[/quote]
Thanks for your opinion. I suspect
you are right but I will verify when I can.

David Christainsen

Christopher Ingham · Guest

On Oct 27, 1:06 pm, chazwin <chazwy...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 17, 3:33 pm, David <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:

by Diana Stoykovahttp://international.ibox.bg/news/id_1100761771

"Archaeologists Discover an Ancient Egyptian
Temple near Pomorie"

David Christainsen

Typical poor reporting. No temple of Isis and Osiris in the second
century CE was likely to have been "Egyptian" any more than a
CHristian temple made today would have to be described as "Greek".

Many of the gods who may have had their greatest expression were found
throughout the Roman empire, this does not make them "Egyptian"
[/quote]
The worship of Isis, Serapis, Bes, and other Egyptian deities was
widespread in the Roman Empire, since mystery religions were
enormously popular in the first centuries CE. Consequently many
Egyptian and Egyptianizing temples were erected throughout the Roman
world.

Christopher Ingham

chazwin · Guest

On Oct 30, 5:36 pm, Christopher Ingham <christophering...@comcast.net>
wrote:
[quote]On Oct 27, 1:06 pm, chazwin <chazwy...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Oct 17, 3:33 pm, David <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:

by Diana Stoykovahttp://international.ibox.bg/news/id_1100761771

"Archaeologists Discover an Ancient Egyptian
Temple near Pomorie"

David Christainsen

Typical poor reporting. No temple of Isis and Osiris in the second
century CE was likely to have been "Egyptian" any more than a
CHristian temple made today would have to be described as "Greek".

Many of the gods who may have had their greatest expression were found
throughout the Roman empire, this does not make them "Egyptian"

The worship of Isis, Serapis, Bes, and other Egyptian deities was
widespread in the Roman Empire, since mystery religions were
enormously popular in the first centuries CE. Consequently many
Egyptian and Egyptianizing temples were erected throughout the Roman
world.
[/quote]
Indeed and just like calling modern Ireland Roman because they are
Catholic.
The Empire was characterised by its religious tolerance.

[quote]
Christopher Ingham[/quote]

LloydB · Guest

On Nov 2, 9:21 am, chazwin <chazwy...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 5:36 pm, Christopher Ingham <christophering...@comcast.net
wrote:

On Oct 27, 1:06 pm, chazwin <chazwy...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Oct 17, 3:33 pm, David <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:

by Diana Stoykovahttp://international.ibox.bg/news/id_1100761771

"Archaeologists Discover an Ancient Egyptian
Temple near Pomorie"

David Christainsen

Typical poor reporting. No temple of Isis and Osiris in the second
century CE was likely to have been "Egyptian" any more than a
CHristian temple made today would have to be described as "Greek".

Many of the gods who may have had their greatest expression were found
throughout the Roman empire, this does not make them "Egyptian"

The worship of Isis, Serapis, Bes, and other Egyptian deities was
widespread in the Roman Empire, since mystery religions were
enormously popular in the first centuries CE. Consequently many
Egyptian and Egyptianizing temples were erected throughout the Roman
world.

Indeed and just like calling modern Ireland Roman because they are
Catholic.
The Empire was characterised by its religious tolerance.

Christopher Ingham
[/quote]
Apparently there>s nothing like a Bulgarian "Isis/Osiris"
temple to get every other type of religious rant fired up.

chazwin · Guest

On Nov 2, 11:06 pm, LloydB <bogart.l...@uwlax.edu> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 2, 9:21 am, chazwin <chazwy...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Oct 30, 5:36 pm, Christopher Ingham <christophering...@comcast.net
wrote:

On Oct 27, 1:06 pm, chazwin <chazwy...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Oct 17, 3:33 pm, David <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:

by Diana Stoykovahttp://international.ibox.bg/news/id_1100761771

"Archaeologists Discover an Ancient Egyptian
Temple near Pomorie"

David Christainsen

Typical poor reporting. No temple of Isis and Osiris in the second
century CE was likely to have been "Egyptian" any more than a
CHristian temple made today would have to be described as "Greek".

Many of the gods who may have had their greatest expression were found
throughout the Roman empire, this does not make them "Egyptian"

The worship of Isis, Serapis, Bes, and other Egyptian deities was
widespread in the Roman Empire, since mystery religions were
enormously popular in the first centuries CE. Consequently many
Egyptian and Egyptianizing temples were erected throughout the Roman
world.

Indeed and just like calling modern Ireland Roman because they are
Catholic.
The Empire was characterised by its religious tolerance.

Christopher Ingham

Apparently there>s nothing like a Bulgarian "Isis/Osiris"
temple to get every other type of religious rant fired up.
[/quote]
What is your point exactly?

Matt Giwer · Guest

Whiskers wrote:
[quote]On 2008-10-25, Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Whiskers wrote:
On 2008-10-24, Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Whiskers wrote:
[...]
What the Egyptian public inscriptions claim the Egyptians ruled, and the
actual extent and degree of their real power and control, are two different
things.
Archaeological evidence from bibleland and all the way to the
Euphrates shows the Egyptians were not exaggerating at all. They did in
fact rule it.

There are Ancient Egyptian monuments in London and Paris, too.
[/quote]
No there are not although some crackpots have claimed it. If I had replied
immediately I would have posted something a bit less polite.

It is not in question that Egypt ruled bibleland all the way to Euphrates.
Israeli arkies freely admit it. Israeli arkies freely admit there is no
question everything prior to the separation of Judah is myth. Bible Unearthed
is one example.

The "promise" of the land from the Nile to the Euphrates is a promise to rule
Egypt.

--
Being against any particular war does not require being against all wars.
Professional pacifists leech off of every war making it nearly impossible to
end even the most disastrous war.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4060
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo/nizgas3.html a4

chazwin · Guest

On Oct 25, 1:12 pm, Whiskers <catwhee...@operamail.com> wrote:
[quote]On 2008-10-25, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:

Whiskers wrote:
On 2008-10-24, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Whiskers wrote:

[...]

What the Egyptian public inscriptions claim the Egyptians ruled, and the
actual extent and degree of their real power and control, are two different
things.

Archaeological evidence from bibleland and all the way to the
Euphrates shows the Egyptians were not exaggerating at all. They did in
fact rule it.

There are Ancient Egyptian monuments in London and Paris, too.
[/quote]
Can we collect that you know the origin of Cleopatra>s Needles? These
were stolen from Egypt in the in 18th and 19th centuries and remounted
as trophies of Empire.

Even if
[quote]one allows that the Egyptians themselves built monuments somewhere, that
isn>t evidence of anything beyond the locals not preventing them.
[/quote]

There
[quote]were undoubtedly local tribes whose 'Egyptian-ness' was no greater than
the 'American-ness' of many tribes in modern Afghanistan - and the
Egyptians didn>t have spy-planes and helicopters and sat-nav, so it would
have been a lot harder for them to really control anything their trusted
officers couldn>t lay hands on. So when the big army with the better
weapons comes through, it>s sensible for the locals to let them get on
with whatever it is they want to do and wait for them to go away again so
that life can return to normal. Possibly with some friction or conflict
when a hot-head gets above his station, giving the Great Power another
battle-honour to claim and another monument to leave behind.

Just as Biblical claims about the power and might and wealth (and
independence) of the Israelite states may not be a precise record of the
facts on the ground. That doesn>t totally invalidate either version of
history.

There is no archaeological evidence of any biblical Israel
whatsoever.

That>s arguable. But what evidence would be expected or recognised
anyway? A people with unremarkable technology for the period and
deliberately not building permanent temples or alters, isn>t going to
leave distinctive traces in the ground. No matter how inflated the claims
of power and wealth of particular leaders might be. (Inflated claims
being obligatory for most tribal rulers in most periods).

Therefore its existence is a myth.

A false conclusion. Just because you can>t see something doesn>t mean it
doesn>t exist.

...

The other examples are not needed as the facts regarding the two are as I
have stated above.

Can you explain how the living god-king of Egypt was flim-flammed
by Abraham

What makes you think anyone was "flim-flammed"?

If you are unfamiliar with Abraham>s racket you can read about it
in Genesis.

So you believe Genesis 12 at face value. Do you believe Genesis 11 too?
Or do you only believe the bits of the Bible that suit you?

(Incidentally, I suspect the Pharaoh who took Sarai 'as his wife' knew
what he was doing - as is revealed when he blames his sin of taking
Abraham>s wife for the famine and sends them both away, with their
new-found wealth).

and was approached by the smelly goatherd Moses?

Read your Bible. Moses was raised in the Royal household as a Prince of
Egypt.

He was not that when the bible says he returned. It does say he was
a wanted for murder. He was an unwashed nobody when he walked up to the
king and started making demands.

He was still who he had been; just an old man. He was 80 and his brother
Aaron 83 when they spoke to the Pharaoh - who was not the same one as had
been angered by Moses killing his slave-driver all those years before.
It>s false to liken the story of Moses to a modern person being 'wanted
for murder'; the social and legal system was entirely unlike yours or
mine. The two old men were not 'nobodies' in any way; they were tribal
leaders in their own right, as well as at least one of them having been
raised in the Egyptian Royal family. (The tribe he joined, described him
as an Egyptian - not as a Hebrew or a slave).

As to the claim of "prince" the story has it he was adopted by a
daughter of the king. The status of prince NEVER passed to the children
of daughters even if not adopted. Again the bible story is wrong about
Egypt.

So how do you explain the bible being all wrong about Egypt?

The Egyptian Royal family was heavily inbred; marriage between siblings
and between parents and their own offspring was the norm. That was how
the divine seed was supposedly preserved. A child raised by a daughter
of a Pharaoh was next-thing to being a God.

The only gripe I have with the Bible>s Egyptian references, is that the
names and dates that would provide a firm link to the Egyptian records,
are missing. But that>s just what you get with things written 'in the
moment' - those there at the time knew that sort of stuff, and sadly
didn>t think of posterity wanting to assign 'absolute' dates to anything.

Can you explain why the god-king of Egypt would have priests in his
court like a Babylonian king when he was the chief priest of all Egypt?

Whether you have a Chief Priest or a God-King, or both in one person, that
rather implies that other, lesser, priests will also be around. Ancient
Egypt seems to have abounded in priests - whole hierarchies of them, along
with a plethora of deities each with a cohort of priests, one of whom in
each hierarchy might well be described as 'Chief Priest' - particularly by
someone sceptical of the Pharaoh>s nature and status.

Attempts to make it appear plausible are not of interest. I am
talking about the real make up of the courts of Egypt and Babylon.

I think it>s silly to claim that there would be no priests in the courts
of a God-king in a land where priests, and Gods, were rife. Are there no
priests in the Vatican?

Then you can explain the REAL magic the priests performed. BTW:
Ever see a snake eating something? They usually time lapse as it is worse
than watching paint dry. The magic snake of Moses ate two snakes while
people watched?

Magic tricks were the stock in trade of all ancient pagan priests.
Perhaps James Randi would be a better person to ask for explanations of
such things - supposing that it>s posible to determine exactly what people
there at the time might actually have experienced. Moses and Aaron might
well have been privy to all sorts of 'secret knowledge' or 'divine power'
not revealed to the common people. But doing magic tricks to impress the
crowd doesn>t really amount to anything beyond using what you have to get
people to do or think what you want - something you can experience at any
political 'rally' or any riot (and in some religious meetings too).

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~[/quote]

Whiskers · Guest

On 2008-11-06, chazwin <chazwyman@yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 25, 1:12Â pm, Whiskers <catwhee...@operamail.com> wrote:
On 2008-10-25, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:

Whiskers wrote:
On 2008-10-24, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Whiskers wrote:

[...]

What the Egyptian public inscriptions claim the Egyptians ruled, and the
actual extent and degree of their real power and control, are two different
things.

Â Â Archaeological evidence from bibleland and all the way to the
Euphrates shows the Egyptians were not exaggerating at all. They did in
fact rule it.

There are Ancient Egyptian monuments in London and Paris, too.

Can we collect that you know the origin of Cleopatra>s Needles? These
were stolen from Egypt in the in 18th and 19th centuries and remounted
as trophies of Empire.
[/quote]
[...]

Yes of course I know that! The fact remains that they are Ancient
Egyptian monuments in London and Paris. (Isn>t there another one in New
York?). My point is that the presence of monuments indicates nothing more
than the presence of monuments.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~

chazwin · Guest

On Nov 6, 11:33 am, Whiskers <catwhee...@operamail.com> wrote:
[quote]On 2008-11-06, chazwin <chazwy...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Oct 25, 1:12 pm, Whiskers <catwhee...@operamail.com> wrote:
On 2008-10-25, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:

Whiskers wrote:
On 2008-10-24, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.REMover.rr.com> wrote:
Whiskers wrote:

[...]

What the Egyptian public inscriptions claim the Egyptians ruled, and the
actual extent and degree of their real power and control, are two different
things.

Archaeological evidence from bibleland and all the way to the
Euphrates shows the Egyptians were not exaggerating at all. They did in
fact rule it.

There are Ancient Egyptian monuments in London and Paris, too.

Can we collect that you know the origin of Cleopatra>s Needles? These
were stolen from Egypt in the in 18th and 19th centuries and remounted
as trophies of Empire.

[...]

Yes of course I know that! The fact remains that they are Ancient
Egyptian monuments in London and Paris. (Isn>t there another one in New
York?). My point is that the presence of monuments indicates nothing more
than the presence of monuments.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
[/quote]
Indeed - and without the history to back up archaeology I am sure
that future generations of archaeology will say of the 20th C that the
entire world was taken over by the "Cola=cola" culture which dominated
every continent, just as they have done with the Celtic myth of "La
Tene" and Halstat, and "Beaker people". Material culture categories
with no context.


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Archaeology Forum	Goto page Previous 1, 2
Page 2 of 2