Breaking

Monday, August 5, 2024

SHEM & THE CHARACTER OF THE GREAT PYRAMID

SHEM & THE CHARACTER OF THE GREAT PYRAMID 

Many are curious about how the ancient Egyptians managed to construct the pyramids using intricate mathematical calculations…

The Papyrus of Ahmose, also known as the Mathematical Rhind, is the oldest known manuscript featuring algebra and trigonometry…

Its origins trace back roughly 3500 years ago…

This manuscript reveals that the Egyptians were proficient in employing first-order equations and had various methods to solve them…

They were also well-versed in quadratic equations, adept at solving them, and familiar with numerical and geometric sequences…

For instance, they were capable of handling equations like:

X2 + y2 = 100

Y = 3/4 x, where x = 8, y = 6

This equation serves as the foundation of the Pythagorean theorem, a2 = b2 + c2

Pythagoras developed his mathematical theories after a visit to Egypt, where he learned from Egyptian priests…

Remarkably, the Egyptians had mastered algebra, trigonometry, and geometry approximately 2,000 years before Pythagoras was born, and even around 3,000 years prior to the birth of al-Khwarizmi…

We may here briefly recapitulate the evidence in proof of the Shepherd kings being the Pyramid builders, Suphis I and Suphis II…

Cheops is a corruption by the Greeks of the Egyptian name Shufu or Khufu…

There is a feature in the names of Suphis I and Suphis II which tends to further identify them with the Shepherd kings…

Shufu, or Shuphu, the Egyptian form of their names, means "much hair," a characteristic which distinguishes them in a radical manner from the Egyptians proper, who carefully shaved…

Similarly Eratosthenes calls Suphis, “Saophis Comastes," which is the Greek for "longhaired.”

This was a distinguishing characteristic of the Semitic Patriarchs and Shepherd kings, and Shepherds were always represented by the Egyptians with ragged locks and unshaven…

If Suphis was "Set the powerful," nicknamed "Salatis," then the admission of Manetho, that "he was arrogant to the gods," is as much as we could expect…

But the priests, his predecessors, who were consulted by Herodotus, were more communicative; "Cheops," i.e., Suphis, they said, ''plunged into every kind of wickedness. For that, having shut up the temples, he first of all forbade them to offer sacrifices, and afterwards he ordered all the Egyptians to work for himself" 

Is not the above an exact parallel of the acts of the Shepherd kings, who are described as "demolishing the temples of the gods," and reducing the inhabitants to slavery?

Cheops, says Herodotus, was succeeded by his brother Chephren (i.e., Suphis II.), who followed the same practices as his predecessor, both in other respects and in building a Pyramid, and that during their two reigns, amounting to 106 years, "the Egyptians suffered all kinds of calamities, and for this length of time the temples were closed and never opened."

In other words, all idolatry was suppressed during that period…

Moreover, as it was only Suphis I. and Suphis II. {i.e., Cheops and Chefren), who suppressed idolatry, they would be the only two kings besides Apepi to whom the hated name of "Shepherd" would be applied…

The hatred also of the idolaters to the memory of the Shepherds is implied by the statement in Genesis xlvi. 34, that "every shepherd is an abomination {i.e., an object of religious hatred) to the Egyptians"; showing that the Shepherd Set, who overthrew Tammuz or Nimrod, and the idolatry established by him, was regarded with precisely the same religious hatred as was Set, the enemy and overthrower of Osiris…

"Shepherds were an abomination to the Egyptians" (Gen. xlvi. 34).”

This, of course, would be the consequence of the destruction of the heathen temples and gods by the Shepherd kings, and the word “abomination" implies that the hatred, which would otherwise have been unmeaning, was of a religious nature…

Speaking of Cheops and Chephren, Herodotus says, "From the hatred they bear them the Egyptians are not very willing to mention their names."

Thus there is the same hatred evinced towards the Pyramid builders as to the Shepherd kings, and as to Set or Typhon…

There are the same accusations of cruelty and oppression…

There is the same overthrow of idolatry in both cases; and the period of the commencement of their rule in Egypt would appear to synchronise exactly…

Again, like the Shepherds, the Pyramid kings are said to have been "men of a different race." 

But there is no mention of them being foreign conquerors, and this exactly accords with the story of Set or Typhon…

Manetho, speaking of the Shepherd kings, says that after they had destroyed the temples they chose one of their number (i.e., Saites or Set), to be king, who, it is clear, was the Shepherd prince Shem, the righteous king of Salem, who, with his flocks and herds and followers, went to Egypt to warn the people against the wickedness and idolatry of their tyrant conqueror…

The fact also that Manetho describes these Pyramid kings as "of a different race," which was just what the Shepherds were, implies that their accession was the result of some kind of revolution…

Here then we have two sets of powerful Egyptian kings, both of a different race to the other kings; both ascending the throne in consequence of a revolution; both overthrowing the worship of the gods; both accused of reducing the inhabitants to slavery; both doing these things at apparently exactly the same period of Egyptian history; both regarded with the same hatred, while from the notice of Herodotus, it would seem that, at one time, the Pyramid kings were actually called "Shepherd kings."

How is it possible to avoid the conclusion that the hated Pyramid kings are the same as the hated Shepherd kings, the evidences of whose identity the priestly historians have taken such care to obliterate?

Is it possible then, that the Pyramid builders, who were among the greatest of the Egyptian kings, were identical with the Shepherd kings, but that the priesthood, for the reasons before mentioned, sought by every means to obliterate this identity?

The story of the Shepherd kings, their overthrow of idolatry and their supposed oppression of the people, is identical in every respect with the story of the Pyramid kings by Herodotus…

Herodotus implies that these Pyramid kings were actually called Shepherds…

The Pyramid kings, as shown by Herodotus, were held in the same abhorrence as the Shepherd kings by the Egyptian priesthood of later times…

The period during which Egyptian idolatry was suppressed under the first two Pyramid, kings is the same as that given to the Shepherd kings, and the respective lengths of their reigns, excluding the co-regency of Suphis II., is seemingly identical with those of the first two Shepherd kings…

The prenomen of the first Shepherd king is the same as that of the first Pyramid king…

The character of the Great Pyramid, built by Suphis I., (Khufu) shows that it could only have been constructed by one who, like Set or Shem, was not only a worshipper of the One God, but a priest and a prophet of that God…

The Great Pyramid is a building the measurements of which symbolise the exact length of the solar year, the variation from a true circle of the earth's circuit of the sun, the precession of the equinoxes, the length of the earth's polar axis, the weight of the earth, its distance from the sun, the length of the sacred cubit used in the construction of the Ark and the Temple, besides various mathematical and other laws; and the knowledge of these things was not only absolutely unknown to the ancients, but the astonishing thing is that these things, many of which seem to have no relation or connection with each other, are symbolised by the relations to each other of, at most, two or three simple measurements, — a result which no human prescience could have conceived to be possible...

Moreover, standing as it does in the midst of the land of Egypt, and yet on its border, towards the desert, it also answers the description of the prophet, "In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord, in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a Pillar at the border thereof, and it shall be for a sign and a witness unto the Lord in the land of Egypt" (Isa. xix. 19, 20)

But if so, then no human wisdom or prescience could have designed it, and its constructor, Khufu, must, like Moses in the construction of the Ark and Tabernacle, have received his instructions from God, and, like Moses, must have been a priest and prophet of God…

Such characteristics can apply to no Egyptian king, except to the Shepherd king, "Set the Powerful," who was Shem, the righteous king of Salem, and "priest of the Most High God."

SOURCE;

(John Garnier, “The Worship of the Dead, Or, The Origin and Nature of Pagan Idolatry and Its Bearing Upon the Early History of Egypt and Babylonia”; 1904)

No comments:

Post a Comment

Pages