Mythology denied;yet, cleverly passed from the ancient gentiles to the mid-eastern tribal nations. still in existence today in Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan. Nations still led by Tribal Warlords and controlled with an enslaving of the mind by Religious Laws held as truth by superstitions of the past...
Let me show you how mythology was passed down even though each religion denies it and claims their Revelations were divine and not hearsay.
Religious commandments, also guided by Ma'at, were written down in Egypt prior to the codification of civil law.
Section from a Book of the Dead
During the 18th Dynasty (between 1580-1350 BCE), The Book of Coming Into the Day, popularly known as The Book of the Dead, was assembled from Egyptian texts and practices. One section of a book recorded the 42 Confessions and 42 Judges that a person would have to pass in order to successfully enter the eternal afterlife. The 42 Confessions are as follows:
1. I have not committed sin.
2. I have not committed robbery with violence.
3. I have not stolen.
4. I have not slain men and women.
5. I have not stolen grain.
6. I have not purloined offerings.
7. I have not stolen the property of God.
8. I have not uttered lies.
9. I have not carried away food.
10. I have not uttered curses.
11. I have not committed adultery, I have not lain with men.
12. I have made none to weep.
13. I have not eaten the heart.
14. I have not attacked any man.
15. I am not a man of deceit.
16. I have not stolen cultivated land.
17. I have not been an eavesdropper.
18. I have not slandered [no man].
19. I have not been angry without just cause.
20. I have not debauched the wife of any man.
21. I have not debauched the wife of [any] man.
22. I have not polluted myself.
23. I have terrorized none.
24. I have not transgressed [the law].
25. I have not been wroth.
27. I have not blasphemed.
28. I am not a man of violence.
29. I have not been a stirrer up of strife.
30. I have not acted with undue haste.
31. I have not pried into matters.
32. I have not multiplied my words in speaking.
33. I have wronged none, I have done no evil.
34. I have not worked witchcraft against the king.
35. I have never stopped [the flow of] water.
36. I have never raised my voice.
37. I have not cursed God.
38. I have not acted with arrogance.
39. I have not stolen the bread of the gods.
40. I have not carried away the khenfu cakes from the spirits of the dead.
41. I have not snatched away the bread of the child, nor treated with contempt the god of my city.
42. I have not slain the cattle belonging to the god.
It must have been very difficult to make it into the Egyptian afterlife, but what this does represent is a clearly defined set of moral standards, even though they were not laws.
Time to take a little Art Break and perhaps purchase a print on a cup or shirt or canvas. Or, whatever.
According to scriptural tradition, after having lived in Babylon and Egypt for hundreds of years, some time around 1300 -1000 BCE the Hebrews established their own state outside of Egypt in Israel. Hebrew texts, indeed the story of Moses and the Exodus, state that the Hebrews worshiped many gods prior to leaving Egypt and didn't have their own laws before they left. Clearly the story of Moses, regardless of its accuracy, tells us that the Hebrews got at least some of their laws and their beliefs from the Egyptians. The Hebrews had also previously lived in the lands of the Sumerians, Assyrians and Babylonians. Modern archeology and scholarship, however, casts serious doubt as to whether this early Israeli state ever existed. Modern scholarship suggests that the Pentateuch (books of Moses) were written between 700 BCE and 500 BCE, when a mythical Moses figure, along with a mythical early kingdom, was invented.
According to the story of Moses, Moses was raised in Egypt by the daughter of a Pharaoh and would have received the best of Egyptian education. If the story is accepted at face value then indeed Moses himself would have been greatly influenced by Egyptian law and knowledge. If the story of Moses is taken as a mythology, similar to the story of Romulus and Remus or any number of other mythical founders of ancient civilizations, then the story is still a reference to the Egyptian origins of Hebrew law.
The Hebrew God commands Moses many times in the horrible atrocities set forth in the first five books of the Torah, which is the trunk holding two branches that are named New Testament and Koran.
This God of Abraham tales is so interwoven neither branch can afford to separate from it. The roots of this two branched super unnatural tree is Egyptian Mythology.
"Mitra" is also a Hindu Bengali title or surname belonging to Kayastha or Kshatriya caste *Mitra (Proto-Indo-Iranian, nominative *Mitras), (Persian, مِهر، میترا or میثره) was an important Indo-Iranian divinity. Following the prehistoric cultural split of Indian and Iranian cultures, names descended from *mitra were used for the following religious entities:
• Mitra (Sanskrit Mitrá-, Mitráḥ), a deity who appears frequently in the ancient Indian text of the Rigveda.
• Mithra (Avestan Miθra-, Miθrō), a yazata mentioned in the Zoroastrian sacred scripture of the Avesta, whose modern Persian equivalent is Mehr.
• Mithras, the principal figure of the Greco-Roman religion of Mithraism.
Emperor Aurelian (270 to 275 CE) blended a number of Pagan solstice celebrations of the nativity of such god-men/saviors as Appolo, Attis, Baal, Dionysus, Helios, Hercules, Horus, Mithra, Osiris, Perseus, and Theseus into a single festival called the "Birthday of the Unconquered Sun" on DEC-25 At the time, Mithraism and Christianity were fierce competitors. Aurelian had even declared Mithraism the official religion of the Roman Empire in 274 CE.
Christianity won out by becoming the new official religion in the 4th century CE, because Roman Emperor Constantine found its use invaluable in motivating the winning of wars enabling him to reunite the mighty Roman Empire which had, prior to, been split. Today we think of Jesus being a god of love and peace. but that can quickly change whenever needed by putting emphases on Scripture readings Matthew 10:34, Luke 12:51 and 22:36 also John 2:15-16.
Next,from Thomas Paine "Age of Reason" I begin with the book of Genesis. In the 14th chapter of
Genesis, the writer gives an account of Lot being taken prisoner in
a battle between the four kings against five, and carried off; and
that when the account of Lot being taken, came to Abraham, he armed
all his household and marched to rescue Lot from the captors, and that
he pursued them unto Dan (ver. 14).
To show in what manner this expression pursuing them unto Dan
applies to the case in question, I will refer to two circumstances,
the one in America, the other in France. The city now called New York,
in America, was originally New Amsterdam; and the town in France,
lately called Havre Marat, was before called Havre de Grace. New
Amsterdam was changed to New York in the year 1664; Havre de
Grace to Havre Marat in 1793. Should, therefore, any writing be found,
though without date, in which the name of New York should be
mentioned, it would be certain evidence that such a uniting could
not have been written before, but must have been written after New
Amsterdam was changed to New York, and consequently, not till after
the year 1664, or at least during the course of that year. And, in
like manner, any dateless writing with the name of Havre Marat would
be certain evidence that such a writing must have been written after
Havre de Grace became Havre Marat, and consequently not till after
the year 1793, or at least during the course of that year.
I now come to the application of those cases, and to show that
there was no such place as Dan, till many years after the death of
Moses, and consequently, that Moses could not be the writer of the
book of Genesis, where this account of pursuing them unto Dan is
given. The place that is called Dan in the Bible was originally a town
of the Gentiles called Laish; and when the tribe of Dan seized upon
this town, they changed its name to Dan, in commemoration of Dan,
who was the father of that tribe, and the great grandson of Abraham.
To establish this in proof, it is necessary to refer from Genesis,
to the 18th chapter of the book called the Book of Judges. It is there
said (ver. 27) that they (the Danites) came unto Laish to a people
that were quiet and secure, and they smote them with the edge of the
sword (the Bible is filled with murder), and burned the city with
fire; and they built a city (ver. 28), and dwelt therein, and they
called the name of the city Dan, after the name of Dan, their
father, howbeit the name of the city was Laish at the first.
This account of the Danites taking possession of Laish and
changing it to Dan, is placed in the Book of Judges immediately
after the death of Sampson. The death of Sampson is said to have
happened 1120 years before Christ, and that of Moses 1451 before
Christ; and, therefore, according to the historical arrangement, the
place was not called Dan till 331 years after the death of Moses.
There is a striking confusion between the historical and the
chronological arrangement in the book of Judges. The five last
chapters, as they stand in the book, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, are put
chronologically before all the preceding chapters; they are made to be
28 years before the 16th chapter, 266 before the 15th, 245 before
the 13th, 195 before the 9th, 90 before the 4th, and 15 years before
the 1st chapter. This shows the uncertain and fabulous state of the
Bible. According to the chronological arrangement, the taking of Laish
and giving it the name of Dan is made to be 20 years after the death
of Joshua, who was the successor of Moses; and by the historical order
as it stands in the book, it is made to be 306 years after the death
of Joshua, and 331 after that of Moses; but they both exclude Moses
from being the writer of Genesis, because, according to either of
the statements, no such place as Dan existed in the time of Moses;
and therefore the writer of Genesis must have been some person who
lived after the town of Laish had the name of Dan; and who that person
was nobody knows, and consequently the book of Genesis is anonymous
and without authority.