spin

Given the amount of twiddling you do with the data, I'm sure you could make the Obama adminstration look like the Osama administration, down to the doormen.

It is interesting that you mined Sheba from the birth name of the glaring omission from your sequence of names, the pharaoh commonly known these days as Psusennes I, who reigned for 46 years, also referred to as Psibkhannu, which is another form of Pasebakahiennuit. You leave him out because you can't make him fit and you change the order of Amenemope with Siamun to maintain your desired order. Then you dig "Sheba" out of the English rendering of Psusennes's birth name (not as you call it his "common title") and find doing so credible. It's all butterfly hooey to me.

Yup.

Well, considering the torah was almost certainly not written for hundreds of years, I sincerely doubt that.

Chili

Hawkers, gawkers and squackers is what Ralf is all about with Moses in charge of the parade leading the innocent astray, much like the rat-cather of Hamlin of yester-years and Billy Graham of recent years, all of them as look-alikes.

To see this just look at the partial transfiguration of Moses wherein only his hair got scorched and his face looked older instead of wiser wherein the halo must be upon him as Logos instead of the idol that they see (Metaphysics XI, 1.), wherein Telic Vision is the final cause post 'par-ousia' confirmed in evidence of the divine, where so now the mind instead of the idol radiates.

Egypto-Israelites are called Messianic Jews these days as saved-sinners too, as if they forcefully occupy the Holy land today with still a battle on their hands to justify just 'who' they are, in both the particular and universal here.

outhouse

Well I agree with the fact Jesus is mythical.

The NT contains quite a bit of mythology surrounding the Jesus legend and the Historical man it all started from after Passover.


The difference is the conspiracy minded mythicist are discounting evidence historians see as the most plausible.

Take what OP is proposing, its just not plausible in any sense.

ralfellis

The fact that you would say that, means that you have no idea how the current chronology of the 21st dynasty was derived.

In reality, there are a number of linen bandages, with a king name and a high priest name, and a year within the reign. And from this, you have to derive a chronology (connecting kings to priests and priests to kings). As you can imagine, there are a number of possible permutations resulting from this technique.

So I took the same historical bandage evidence, applied it to the biblical chronology (which only has one David/Psusennes), and it fitted perfectly.


You should not comment so freely, if you are uncertain of the facts.


Ralph

.

semiopen

Aris Hobeth is the guy I know best in this line.

I don't see him as a Messianic Jew, we've had some amusing debates about the Shroud of Turin, etc.

Of course, you tell any of these guys that they are not completely sane they look at you like this observation has never been made to them before.

ralfellis

Do you not know what the Moses (and Jesus) transfiguration was all about? Do we need to spell it out for you in words of one syllable?

Well here Moses is, in all his glory:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-2-JrcKVbQm...80-300+BC_.jpg


Yes, an image of Helios, radient and burning like fire all around the head.


.

Chili

WOW, that's all history based on theology and no part of me. And I know, steadfast they are as if their source of fire is from within.

I just see the contradiction in Messainic-Jew wherein Messiah is saved and sinner still as Jew.

And I am not here to criticize but to critically review and so not to condemn anyone, nor even defend the shroud of Turin wherein only evidence is sought while logos is the place to be an not just to see, i.e the son identified now as the self.

Just go to the difference between the temple upset in Matthew wherein he comfirmed that "My house shall be called a house of prayer" (21:13), to say that he remained torn as saved-sinner near the end of his purgation stage in [the Gospel of] his own life, as opposite to John where the ruckuss was made from the precinct even, never to set foot in there again already in verse 2:13.

Opposite this again here, Mark healed his mother-law so that doubt would serve him again from that day on (as if this is where the HS flew the coop again). Just notice the word "Immediately" in Mk. 2:29 after he left the synagogue and healed her right then and there so she would attend to him again in doubt as the opposite to faith.

Let me add here that the gifts received by the Magi were faith, hope, and charity to replace the old gold, bdellium and lapis lazula found in the land of Havilah where these are sought to radiate (gold is good), while here now these gifts are meant to contemplate so that the New [telic] end may be found wherein logos is the self to elevate.

Then read that Joseph was not home in Matthew when they arrived while in Luke the shepherds only needed to look in to understand without even the Magi being there = is knowledge frees.

spin

I'm sitting here with my trusty copy of Ken Kitchen's revised 3rd Intermediate Period, which goes into the chronology in nauseous detail about the pharaohs and priests, their nomenclature and their deeds.

We find that Ramses XI is not the father of Nesbanebdjedet (Smendes), though he may have been his father in law. And while we are with Nesbanebdjedet, I must note your pure chicanery with this:

B .. Ammin- -nad -dab,
H .. Amen- -Nes -ba -neb -djed,

There is no "Amun" anywhere in Smendes's titulary. You have merely inserted it in here in order to make Nesbanebdjedet look a little like Amminadab. That's fraudulent, isn't it ralfellis?

As Psusennes I is son of high priest Pinudjem I, he is not a descendant of Smendes (Nesbanebdjedet), so his (probable) descendant, Amenemope, are not of the same lineage as Smendes, so you truly have a screwed up line of descent. You merely fake the lineage in order to make it look the best you can by deception, omission and twiddling names for appearance sake.

This is a table of the rulers of the 21st dynasty. The column marked "re order" reflects your desired order of names and "re name" indicates your supposed equivalents. (Page numbers are to Kitchen's tome.)

[t2]Name|Reign|Father|re order|re name||
Ramses XI|1107-1078|Ramses X ? |1 |Ram ||
Nesbanebdjedet (Smendes)|1077-1052|Herihor or the father of Herihor ? (p.538)|2 |Amminadab ||
Amenemnisu|1051-1047|Smendes or Herihor ? (p.538)|3 |Nahshon ||
Psibkhanno (Psusennes I)|1047-1001|Pinudjem I|- |- ||
Amenemope|1001-992|Psusennes I ?|6 |Obed ||
Osorkon the Elder|992-986|Mehtenweskhet ? (p.535)|5 |Boaz ||
Siamun|986-967|unknown (p.541)|4 |Salmon ||
Psusennes II|967-943|Pinudjem II|- |- [/t2]
Note the evidence available for the fathers of these pharaohs, nothing like what you desire. The ralfellis version is a cock-up of massive proportions.

You've said nothing to give anyone the inkling that your stuff is anything other than butterfly hooey.

spin

To clarify, "Amun" is not part of Smendes's names: it is frequent that there is other information related to a pharaoh, such as a favored deity or a role included in a cartouche, the most common being "mery-amun", ie "beloved of Amun", but it is not part of the name. One finds along with Smendes's birth name the description "mey-amun". His birth name cartouche reads "Nesbanebdjedet mery Amun", his birth name plus the fact that he is beloved of Amun.

MrMacSon

OK. I take your point/s.

I'll say - There do not appear to be any primary sources for the alleged events or alleged peoples at the proposed early first-century start of Christianity.
.