Those ancient Egyptians were "nuts"

[eagle1462010]

Joseph and Imhotep - CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science

The identity Joseph in Egyptian history is debated, but some scholars identify him with Imhotep, who was the vizier during the Third Dynasty under PharaohNetjerikhet (also called Djoser / Zoser). It this possible? Many scholars debate whether Imhotep himself was a real person or just a contrived legend. Either way, Imhotep is described as having been born in Egypt to Egyptian parents (his father was an architect named Kanofer), he served under multiple Pharoahs[1], and was fully Egyptian. We have no records of his age upon death. Joseph on the other hand, was Hebrew (a descendant of Eber) and in no wise of Egyptian descent.

he Famine Stele is one such Non-Biblical Egyptian record that not only proves that Netjeriket and Djoser were the same person, it shows that Djoser owned the land and had the right to give land to the priests. The Famine Stele also gives an account of a seven year famine in which Imhotep is credited with saving Egypt by interpreting the Pharaoh's dream.

Given the many similarities between Joseph and Imhotep and the finding of of some of the oldest grain silos in Egypt in the Step Pyramid complex of Djoser, the Famine Stele is powerful proof that Joseph and Imhotep were the same person.

 

[tyroneweaver]

Pyramids were built in 2560 bc
Abraham 2085 BC
Joseph 1898

I haven't been following this thread. but when Joseph stored the grain, I don't think it was in the pyramids

I saw those dates as well...............but some theorize that the timeline of Joseph was possibly during the Step Pyramid............time frame.

You're talking a language I'm unfamiliar with.

 

[eagle1462010]

If there was wheat/grains stored in these pyramids it wasn''t for public consumption. It was for the dead pharaoh and his priest and princesses to aid them on the other side.

I don't know................I understand that they stored food and wine, and basically everything he'd need in the afterlife.............but they did store food and grain for that afterlife.................

Did they use it to store food while the Pharoh is still alive.........don't know......... 4500 years ago.............who the hell knows.

I could see food in the pyramid for the workers, that must have been massive. But for the public I'm leaning against that.

The Pyramid wasn't the only place that there were vast tunnels................Article I posted was of the Step Pyramid.............showed it was 37 acres in size for the whole complex................Many tunnels for possible food storage were found under the other parts of the 37 acres..........

 

[FA_Q2]

And what Carson stated pyramids might have been used for matters because?

Really, there are dozens of threads bashing Carson and the one thing that is totally absent in almost all of them is a single point on POLICY. And people seem to wonder why we get such shit candidates running for the high office. It is because asinine shit like this is talked about/has a larger influence on voters than actual policy.

 

[eagle1462010]

And what Carson stated pyramids might have been used for matters because?

Really, there are dozens of threads bashing Carson and the one thing that is totally absent in almost all of them is a single point on POLICY. And people seem to wonder why we get such shit candidates running for the high office. It is because asinine shit like this is talked about/has a larger influence on voters than actual policy.

It doesn't matter to those who want policy and not BS..................The left is using this to try and trash him in any way they can.........What the Pyramids were used doesn't matter to them.............It is a form of attack to try to bring him down and the status quo up.................

I personally don't care whether or not they used them as food storage 4500 years ago.................I do care that they are attacking the man for a theory..............

 

[occupied]

Was any grain found in any of them?

I don't think they were for grain storage but that idea has been around for a very long time. What is the purpose, if a tomb, for the large open rooms, at least in the Great Pyramid? Grain could have been eaten by rodents, if there were actually grain in them, which I doubt. But then again the Great Pyramid wasn't a tomb.

Of course it was. Gigantic pile of stone, only one room to speak of, coffin shaped box, there could be no other use. The place was robbed in antiquity, stripped of it's limestone and gold covering along with everything of value including the mummies which were ground up and used for medicine as recently as the 19th century. You didn't even have an opinion on this until a few days ago so quit acting as if it is an informed opinion.

Depends on the Pyramid............and the time frame......I'm no expert at all......but I did some reading on it the other day to see where Carson might get his opinion..............

The sun doesn't shine in the place he got his opinion, you might need to bring along a miner's helmet light in your study of the intellectual content of his rectal cavity.

Whatever.................I read to get an understanding of why he would have that theory.............he used Genesis and the story of Joseph to come to a Hypothesis of pyramids storing food..........The only Pyramid I've seen so far that MIGHT have done so was the Step Pyramids.........don't see Giza doing so.......................

3 and a 1/2 miles of tunnels dug out so far.............You could store quite a bit in those tunnels.........7 years worth...............don't have a clue..................

The guy is trying to prove the bible is an entirely factual historical document by simply making up shit. If you ask Jewish historical scholars if the old testament should be taken literally they say no. They know that the stories presented started out as generational oral histories long before they were written down and are full of embellishments, omissions and fabrications.

 

[tyroneweaver]

I don't think they were for grain storage but that idea has been around for a very long time. What is the purpose, if a tomb, for the large open rooms, at least in the Great Pyramid? Grain could have been eaten by rodents, if there were actually grain in them, which I doubt. But then again the Great Pyramid wasn't a tomb.

Of course it was. Gigantic pile of stone, only one room to speak of, coffin shaped box, there could be no other use. The place was robbed in antiquity, stripped of it's limestone and gold covering along with everything of value including the mummies which were ground up and used for medicine as recently as the 19th century. You didn't even have an opinion on this until a few days ago so quit acting as if it is an informed opinion.

Depends on the Pyramid............and the time frame......I'm no expert at all......but I did some reading on it the other day to see where Carson might get his opinion..............

The sun doesn't shine in the place he got his opinion, you might need to bring along a miner's helmet light in your study of the intellectual content of his rectal cavity.

Whatever.................I read to get an understanding of why he would have that theory.............he used Genesis and the story of Joseph to come to a Hypothesis of pyramids storing food..........The only Pyramid I've seen so far that MIGHT have done so was the Step Pyramids.........don't see Giza doing so.......................

3 and a 1/2 miles of tunnels dug out so far.............You could store quite a bit in those tunnels.........7 years worth...............don't have a clue..................

The guy is trying to prove the bible is an entirely factual historical document by simply making up shit. If you ask Jewish historical scholars if the old testament should be taken literally they say no. They know that the stories presented started out as generational oral histories long before they were written down and are full of embellishments, omissions and fabrications.

The first 5 books of the bible were written by a Levite.

 

[SwimExpert]

No dead bodies were found in any of the pyramids at Giza.

Was any grain found in any of them?

I don't think they were for grain storage but that idea has been around for a very long time. What is the purpose, if a tomb, for the large open rooms, at least in the Great Pyramid? Grain could have been eaten by rodents, if there were actually grain in them, which I doubt. But then again the Great Pyramid wasn't a tomb.

So, you mean to tell me that every other pyramid was built as a tomb, but this one was something entirely different? All while containing much of the same things other pyramids contained when they were used as tombs? That is an extraordinary claim.

BTW, tombs with lots of extra space remain common to this day. For example, there's this building:

 

[occupied]

Of course it was. Gigantic pile of stone, only one room to speak of, coffin shaped box, there could be no other use. The place was robbed in antiquity, stripped of it's limestone and gold covering along with everything of value including the mummies which were ground up and used for medicine as recently as the 19th century. You didn't even have an opinion on this until a few days ago so quit acting as if it is an informed opinion.

Depends on the Pyramid............and the time frame......I'm no expert at all......but I did some reading on it the other day to see where Carson might get his opinion..............

The sun doesn't shine in the place he got his opinion, you might need to bring along a miner's helmet light in your study of the intellectual content of his rectal cavity.

Whatever.................I read to get an understanding of why he would have that theory.............he used Genesis and the story of Joseph to come to a Hypothesis of pyramids storing food..........The only Pyramid I've seen so far that MIGHT have done so was the Step Pyramids.........don't see Giza doing so.......................

3 and a 1/2 miles of tunnels dug out so far.............You could store quite a bit in those tunnels.........7 years worth...............don't have a clue..................

The guy is trying to prove the bible is an entirely factual historical document by simply making up shit. If you ask Jewish historical scholars if the old testament should be taken literally they say no. They know that the stories presented started out as generational oral histories long before they were written down and are full of embellishments, omissions and fabrications.

The first 5 books of the bible were written by a Levite.

That's hardly a stretch as the first people who became literate in Hebrew were the priestly class. They are called the "Books of Moses" and tradition states they were written by him but careful analysis has revealed several writers were involved and was written over hundreds of years. Study of the bible without any religious axes to grind has much to teach us but trying to make actual history line up with the narrative only serves to cloud history.

 

[Arizona Willie]

Is there anyone here with a background in agriculture who can explain why you would not store grain several stories up in pyramidal structure that's largely solid and that took decades to build?

Bulk storage facilities all have one thing in common: a large volume of empty space. The pyramids are all solid buildings with relatively little interior space. The materials used to build the pyramids could have been much more economically used to enclose a far, far larger volume if that had been the purpose of such structures. They were built to protect the extensive funerary goods and mummified remains of a pharaoh from plunder. The tomb complex at the valley of the kings had already been robbed in antiquity so they made an effort to build a tomb so massive that it could not be robbed. Ultimately they failed as the first Europeans to tunnel into the pyramids found they were not the first to do so. Did you catch that? The pyramids had to be tunneled into. Does not seem right to store grain in a structure with hardly any interior space and no door.

========
Claiming the pyramids were for grain storage is the leading candidate for dumbass statement of the century.

In my opinion, Carson has suffered one or more strokes. That's why he made the medical mistakes that caused them to take his knife away and him to " retire ". It would also explain the nonsense gibberish he spews on a daily basis. He lives in lala land.

 

[Arizona Willie]

The Egyptian pyramid grain storage scheme was created to provide armoring against migrating plant eating dinosaurs as explained by award winning paleontologist Dr. Ben Carson in his new autobiographical book, Ben Carson "The Man, and His Many Careers"!

========

Please remember to add the </snark> at the end of your posts. Otherwise conservatives will be claiming them and reposting them as < supporting > their position.

 

[peach174]

Really, those ancient Egyptians must have either been nuts or have had a weird sense of humor (at least according to that renowned Egyptologist, Dr. Ben Carson) when placing dead bodies next to their food source.

How about you learning some facts yourself before you put down Dr. Ben?

http://www.scottcreighton.co.uk/PDF-Files/Ten Facts that Contradict the Pyramid Tomb Theory.pdf

For the best part of 200 years, the pyramids of Egypt have been regarded by

Egyptologists as the tombs of ancient Egyptian kings and queens and as the

instrument of rebirth (for the king only) that would enable the transfiguration of the

soul into an Akh (an effective being of light) whereupon it could pass through the

Duat (the Underworld) and hopefully onwards into an undisturbed, everlasting


Afterlife among the gods. The idea that these structures were conceived and built as

tombs is all pervasive to our modern mindset, so much so that many have come to

accept the idea as being not so much a theory but as actual fact.

So why then should it be deemed necessary to question what many regard as fact?

The first thing to say is that the evidence in support of the tomb theory is only

circumstantial; there is no direct primary evidence to support the pyramid tomb

theory. Neither are there any ancient Egyptian texts that state why the ancient

Egyptians conceived and built their pyramids. Indeed, there are a number of ancient

texts that state the pyramids were not used as tombs. For example, first century BC


historian, Diodorus Siculus, writes:

“The kings designed these pyramids for their sepulchres, yet it happened that

their remains were not here deposited.”

"Describing the Great Pyramids and the hatred their builders supposedly

attracted to themselves, Diodorus follows the tradition of Herodotus; he adds,

however, that their bodies were never buried in them, but rather that the

rulers commanded that their bodies be placed in a secure place that was kept

secret." (C. Zivie-Coche 2002 (1997): 102)

However, even in the absence of any direct evidence, Egyptology has made a

considerable case based solely on the circumstantial evidence it has uncovered (much

from later times) in support of the pyramid tomb theory. But just how strong is their

case? What, if anything, is there that might cast doubt on the Egyptologists’

interpretation of the evidence that brought them to conclude that all pyramids in

ancient Egypt were conceived and built as tombs?

This article will present ten facts that, whilst not conclusively disproving the tomb

theory, nonetheless raise some vexing questions as to the veracity of the pyramid

tomb theory. These facts are presented in no particular order and arise from a number

of sources that include the physical, logistical, practical, functional and mythical.

 

[g5000]

Really, those ancient Egyptians must have either been nuts or have had a weird sense of humor (at least according to that renowned Egyptologist, Dr. Ben Carson) when placing dead bodies next to their food source.

How about you learning some facts yourself before you put down Dr. Ben?

http://www.scottcreighton.co.uk/PDF-Files/Ten Facts that Contradict the Pyramid Tomb Theory.pdf

For the best part of 200 years, the pyramids of Egypt have been regarded by

Egyptologists as the tombs of ancient Egyptian kings and queens and as the

instrument of rebirth (for the king only) that would enable the transfiguration of the

soul into an Akh (an effective being of light) whereupon it could pass through the

Duat (the Underworld) and hopefully onwards into an undisturbed, everlasting


Afterlife among the gods. The idea that these structures were conceived and built as

tombs is all pervasive to our modern mindset, so much so that many have come to

accept the idea as being not so much a theory but as actual fact.

So why then should it be deemed necessary to question what many regard as fact?

The first thing to say is that the evidence in support of the tomb theory is only

circumstantial; there is no direct primary evidence to support the pyramid tomb

theory. Neither are there any ancient Egyptian texts that state why the ancient

Egyptians conceived and built their pyramids. Indeed, there are a number of ancient

texts that state the pyramids were not used as tombs. For example, first century BC


historian, Diodorus Siculus, writes:

“The kings designed these pyramids for their sepulchres, yet it happened that

their remains were not here deposited.”

"Describing the Great Pyramids and the hatred their builders supposedly

attracted to themselves, Diodorus follows the tradition of Herodotus; he adds,

however, that their bodies were never buried in them, but rather that the

rulers commanded that their bodies be placed in a secure place that was kept

secret." (C. Zivie-Coche 2002 (1997): 102)

However, even in the absence of any direct evidence, Egyptology has made a

considerable case based solely on the circumstantial evidence it has uncovered (much

from later times) in support of the pyramid tomb theory. But just how strong is their

case? What, if anything, is there that might cast doubt on the Egyptologists’

interpretation of the evidence that brought them to conclude that all pyramids in

ancient Egypt were conceived and built as tombs?

This article will present ten facts that, whilst not conclusively disproving the tomb

theory, nonetheless raise some vexing questions as to the veracity of the pyramid

tomb theory. These facts are presented in no particular order and arise from a number

of sources that include the physical, logistical, practical, functional and mythical.

So you're quoting a wackadoo to support Carson now? Really? The bozo thinks the pyramids are a doomsday clock.

You aren't exactly disproving the theory that Carson and his supporters are idiots.

 

[bendog]

Really, those ancient Egyptians must have either been nuts or have had a weird sense of humor (at least according to that renowned Egyptologist, Dr. Ben Carson) when placing dead bodies next to their food source.

How about you learning some facts yourself before you put down Dr. Ben?

http://www.scottcreighton.co.uk/PDF-Files/Ten Facts that Contradict the Pyramid Tomb Theory.pdf

For the best part of 200 years, the pyramids of Egypt have been regarded by

Egyptologists as the tombs of ancient Egyptian kings and queens and as the

instrument of rebirth (for the king only) that would enable the transfiguration of the

soul into an Akh (an effective being of light) whereupon it could pass through the

Duat (the Underworld) and hopefully onwards into an undisturbed, everlasting


Afterlife among the gods. The idea that these structures were conceived and built as

tombs is all pervasive to our modern mindset, so much so that many have come to

accept the idea as being not so much a theory but as actual fact.

So why then should it be deemed necessary to question what many regard as fact?

The first thing to say is that the evidence in support of the tomb theory is only

circumstantial; there is no direct primary evidence to support the pyramid tomb

theory. Neither are there any ancient Egyptian texts that state why the ancient

Egyptians conceived and built their pyramids. Indeed, there are a number of ancient

texts that state the pyramids were not used as tombs. For example, first century BC


historian, Diodorus Siculus, writes:

“The kings designed these pyramids for their sepulchres, yet it happened that

their remains were not here deposited.”

"Describing the Great Pyramids and the hatred their builders supposedly

attracted to themselves, Diodorus follows the tradition of Herodotus; he adds,

however, that their bodies were never buried in them, but rather that the

rulers commanded that their bodies be placed in a secure place that was kept

secret." (C. Zivie-Coche 2002 (1997): 102)

However, even in the absence of any direct evidence, Egyptology has made a

considerable case based solely on the circumstantial evidence it has uncovered (much

from later times) in support of the pyramid tomb theory. But just how strong is their

case? What, if anything, is there that might cast doubt on the Egyptologists’

interpretation of the evidence that brought them to conclude that all pyramids in

ancient Egypt were conceived and built as tombs?

This article will present ten facts that, whilst not conclusively disproving the tomb

theory, nonetheless raise some vexing questions as to the veracity of the pyramid

tomb theory. These facts are presented in no particular order and arise from a number

of sources that include the physical, logistical, practical, functional and mythical.

So you're quoting a wackadoo to support Carson now? Really? The bozo thinks the pyramids are a doomsday clock.

You aren't exactly disproving the theory that Carson and his supporters are idiots.

That's what I don't get. Of course Dr. CArson is essentially doing black face with his claims to a violent past and west point, but that's really irrelevant to his being a lunatic! Why isn't THAT the story?

 

[peach174]

Really, those ancient Egyptians must have either been nuts or have had a weird sense of humor (at least according to that renowned Egyptologist, Dr. Ben Carson) when placing dead bodies next to their food source.

How about you learning some facts yourself before you put down Dr. Ben?

http://www.scottcreighton.co.uk/PDF-Files/Ten Facts that Contradict the Pyramid Tomb Theory.pdf

For the best part of 200 years, the pyramids of Egypt have been regarded by

Egyptologists as the tombs of ancient Egyptian kings and queens and as the

instrument of rebirth (for the king only) that would enable the transfiguration of the

soul into an Akh (an effective being of light) whereupon it could pass through the

Duat (the Underworld) and hopefully onwards into an undisturbed, everlasting


Afterlife among the gods. The idea that these structures were conceived and built as

tombs is all pervasive to our modern mindset, so much so that many have come to

accept the idea as being not so much a theory but as actual fact.

So why then should it be deemed necessary to question what many regard as fact?

The first thing to say is that the evidence in support of the tomb theory is only

circumstantial; there is no direct primary evidence to support the pyramid tomb

theory. Neither are there any ancient Egyptian texts that state why the ancient

Egyptians conceived and built their pyramids. Indeed, there are a number of ancient

texts that state the pyramids were not used as tombs. For example, first century BC


historian, Diodorus Siculus, writes:

“The kings designed these pyramids for their sepulchres, yet it happened that

their remains were not here deposited.”

"Describing the Great Pyramids and the hatred their builders supposedly

attracted to themselves, Diodorus follows the tradition of Herodotus; he adds,

however, that their bodies were never buried in them, but rather that the

rulers commanded that their bodies be placed in a secure place that was kept

secret." (C. Zivie-Coche 2002 (1997): 102)

However, even in the absence of any direct evidence, Egyptology has made a

considerable case based solely on the circumstantial evidence it has uncovered (much

from later times) in support of the pyramid tomb theory. But just how strong is their

case? What, if anything, is there that might cast doubt on the Egyptologists’

interpretation of the evidence that brought them to conclude that all pyramids in

ancient Egypt were conceived and built as tombs?

This article will present ten facts that, whilst not conclusively disproving the tomb

theory, nonetheless raise some vexing questions as to the veracity of the pyramid

tomb theory. These facts are presented in no particular order and arise from a number

of sources that include the physical, logistical, practical, functional and mythical.

So you're quoting a wackadoo to support Carson now? Really? The bozo thinks the pyramids are a doomsday clock.

You aren't exactly disproving the theory that Carson and his supporters are idiots.

Not so much him, but as the fact that no bodies have been found in the Egyptian Pyramids and the quote from the historian, Diodorus Siculus.

 

[bendog]

Really, those ancient Egyptians must have either been nuts or have had a weird sense of humor (at least according to that renowned Egyptologist, Dr. Ben Carson) when placing dead bodies next to their food source.

How about you learning some facts yourself before you put down Dr. Ben?

http://www.scottcreighton.co.uk/PDF-Files/Ten Facts that Contradict the Pyramid Tomb Theory.pdf

For the best part of 200 years, the pyramids of Egypt have been regarded by

Egyptologists as the tombs of ancient Egyptian kings and queens and as the

instrument of rebirth (for the king only) that would enable the transfiguration of the

soul into an Akh (an effective being of light) whereupon it could pass through the

Duat (the Underworld) and hopefully onwards into an undisturbed, everlasting


Afterlife among the gods. The idea that these structures were conceived and built as

tombs is all pervasive to our modern mindset, so much so that many have come to

accept the idea as being not so much a theory but as actual fact.

So why then should it be deemed necessary to question what many regard as fact?

The first thing to say is that the evidence in support of the tomb theory is only

circumstantial; there is no direct primary evidence to support the pyramid tomb

theory. Neither are there any ancient Egyptian texts that state why the ancient

Egyptians conceived and built their pyramids. Indeed, there are a number of ancient

texts that state the pyramids were not used as tombs. For example, first century BC


historian, Diodorus Siculus, writes:

“The kings designed these pyramids for their sepulchres, yet it happened that

their remains were not here deposited.”

"Describing the Great Pyramids and the hatred their builders supposedly

attracted to themselves, Diodorus follows the tradition of Herodotus; he adds,

however, that their bodies were never buried in them, but rather that the

rulers commanded that their bodies be placed in a secure place that was kept

secret." (C. Zivie-Coche 2002 (1997): 102)

However, even in the absence of any direct evidence, Egyptology has made a

considerable case based solely on the circumstantial evidence it has uncovered (much

from later times) in support of the pyramid tomb theory. But just how strong is their

case? What, if anything, is there that might cast doubt on the Egyptologists’

interpretation of the evidence that brought them to conclude that all pyramids in

ancient Egypt were conceived and built as tombs?

This article will present ten facts that, whilst not conclusively disproving the tomb

theory, nonetheless raise some vexing questions as to the veracity of the pyramid

tomb theory. These facts are presented in no particular order and arise from a number

of sources that include the physical, logistical, practical, functional and mythical.

So you're quoting a wackadoo to support Carson now? Really? The bozo thinks the pyramids are a doomsday clock.

You aren't exactly disproving the theory that Carson and his supporters are idiots.

Not so much him, but as the fact that no bodies have been found in the Egyptian Pyramids and the quote from the historian, Diodorus Siculus.

I dunno about some greek dude, but the pyramids not having bodies in them is pretty suspicious.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Good grief.... the left is in full-blown meltdown mode today.

 

[bendog]

Well the bodies couldn't have just DISAPPEARED! Maybe Carson isn't insane?

 

[Arizona Willie]

I dunno about some greek dude, but the pyramids not having bodies in them is pretty suspicious.

========
Where the hell do you think they found King Tut?

There have been quite a few mummified people found in burial vaults in the pyramids. Where the hell did you get the idea that no bodies have ever been found in them?

Oh... yeah ... Fox News.

 

[nat4900]

Where the hell do you think they found King Tut?

There have been quite a few mummified people found in burial vaults in the pyramids. Where they hell did you get the idea that no bodies have ever been found in them?

Oh... yeah ... Fox News.

Sometimes I think that for right wingers there IS a different reality-universe.