Lİnuxgal:
- Yes and the world is not 6000 years old either. But on the Age of these prophets. I have a theory (as crazy as it seems). We are currently witnessing an extension of our average age from about 30 to 40 years toward 100 years in most developed countries. One theory states that in earlier ages (whose existence is currently pure speculation) people used to have greater spiritual knowledge and were therefore able to extent their lifespan to almost 300 years. (I don’t really believe it myself, but I do consider it as a possibility).
I don’t have a tangible proof for the exodus. Yet in the Quran the pharaoh says in Zuhruf 51,53 “Don’t you see that these rivers are flowing from under my feet?”
![[Image: statues-entrance-Ramses-II-Great-Temple-Aswan.jpg]](https://cdn.britannica.com/27/178127-050-3C447D4F/statues-entrance-Ramses-II-Great-Temple-Aswan.jpg)
As I have said before archaeological correlations are quite rare in religious issues. But why would the Bible and the Quran refer to the exodus if it was pure fiction? I think there is a strong chance the event truly happened and I think it happened during the early reign of Ramses II.
Grand Nudger: According to the book I am reading, it is the prophet himself who said that after him, true religious leadership (also known as the kalifate – not ISIL kalifate what I am referring to is Islamic terminology - ) would go on only about 30 years. And just as he prophesized, the prophet dies in 632. There was 4 caliphate (as truly religious leaders) who succeeded him. Than in 661 his son in law Ali was assassinated. Than the son of Ali was murdered with all his followers in the Karbala event in 680 (but this is secondary information). And than the word “caliphate” became synonymous with “Sultan” (Whose original meaning was something like “divine evidence”) and became the ownership of whoever was strong enough to claim it. This is why many Muslim scholars refer to all the “caliph’s” who came after Ali as “Meliki-Adud” (kingdom of oppressors).
But this is the purely intellectual approach. I am a part of those who believe that perhaps not all the messages of holy books is meant to be understood by all the readers at any given time. I don’t know if the creation of a secular state with high moral values would haven truly realistic in the 7th century AD. One possibility is that each generation has to reinterpret the original message according with the existing realities of its time. (or that’s my theory).
On Moses: The magicians see him as a usurper who wants the riches of the Nile and they secretly tell the pharaoh “this is a great magician” (hypnotist, liar, propagandist) who only aims to conquer the worldly possessions of the pharaoh (because the pharaoh says in one place “Am I not greater than him? Why didn’t his God give him any worldly riches and power if he is as great as he is?” And before the 7 curses of Egypt (plague, famine, frogs etc…) Moses prays to God and say “Extingish the wealth and worldly power of the Pharaoh”. Because The Pharaoh has convictions but has no spiritual understanding. He perceives greatness in wealth, military power and magic (power to fool and manipulate the masses). And Moses is been given two miracles on is is shiny white hand that he pulls out of his clothes (I don’t know if this one is present in the Biblical version). This is just like the white hand of truth prevailing over the darkness of lies and the second is (as you know) His stick who devours the serpents of the magician (like the truth devouring lies when it is clearly being demonstrated to even the strongest believers in lies).
But I agree with you. The story might also be purely allegorical. Intellectuals say that it is the message that is being conveyed matters rather than historical correlations. The first message is just my theory.
And here is an example of my theory. (A’Raf 35/7) 141 says: “….They (the pharaoh and his entourage) were killing your boys, were maintaining a hand on the body of your women….”
I said that the meaning of this verse cannot be birth control or even contraception. Because if I am correct and the story is taking place in the 13th century BC. There were only very limited methods of contraception at the time whose effect were only partial. Even condoms made of animal digestive systems did not appear before the 1700’s (of our era). There are records of abortion practices in antiquity in wikipedia but the same page is saying that abortions in hospital environments in the early 1800’s had a death rate of 30%. Truly efficient medical procedures didn’t start (in the developed world) before the end of the 19th century. Abortion pills were not invented before the 1930’s and real methods of contraception (like contraception pills) were only commercialize din the 60’s and 70’s.
So what is the pharaohs hand doing on the body of women?
- I think that the holy book is telling us that “conservative / theocratic rulers want as many children as possible. They don’t like the very idea that women can have control over their own bodies. And they want absolute control over male and female bodies just as they have control over male and female minds”
(Taha 45/20- Verses 71-73): “The pharaoh said: “Did you dare to believe (this magician = Moses) without first asking for my permission?... I will cut you hand and your feet and hang you on a date tree. Then you will know whose punishment is greater His (God’s) or mine…”
I cannot explain the pharaoh having a hand on the female uterus in another way (because the same thing is being mentioned in one or two other places). He is said to be treating women badly and to do inappropriate things to them. Yet “having a hand on the female body” is probably to be interpreted literally: “He has a hand on the female body” as in “controlling the female body in order to control society as a whole”.
One modern example of this from the 25th of November:
https://www.duvarenglish.com/police-crack-down-on-womens-rights-marches-in-turkey-news-61574
One modern example of this from the 25th of November:
- Similar scenes were repeated today. In the second video on the website on female demonstrator is heard yelling “Why won’t you let us pass? What could we possibly do to you?”
What do you think he would say if I asked “The Great One” “What could those women do to you? Why won’t you let them march for their right to live (basically)?”
Simple: Theocratic leaders don’t like the idea. They have (and have always had) this obsession with the female body and they cannot leave it alone on its own.
- Yes and the world is not 6000 years old either. But on the Age of these prophets. I have a theory (as crazy as it seems). We are currently witnessing an extension of our average age from about 30 to 40 years toward 100 years in most developed countries. One theory states that in earlier ages (whose existence is currently pure speculation) people used to have greater spiritual knowledge and were therefore able to extent their lifespan to almost 300 years. (I don’t really believe it myself, but I do consider it as a possibility).
I don’t have a tangible proof for the exodus. Yet in the Quran the pharaoh says in Zuhruf 51,53 “Don’t you see that these rivers are flowing from under my feet?”
As I have said before archaeological correlations are quite rare in religious issues. But why would the Bible and the Quran refer to the exodus if it was pure fiction? I think there is a strong chance the event truly happened and I think it happened during the early reign of Ramses II.
Grand Nudger: According to the book I am reading, it is the prophet himself who said that after him, true religious leadership (also known as the kalifate – not ISIL kalifate what I am referring to is Islamic terminology - ) would go on only about 30 years. And just as he prophesized, the prophet dies in 632. There was 4 caliphate (as truly religious leaders) who succeeded him. Than in 661 his son in law Ali was assassinated. Than the son of Ali was murdered with all his followers in the Karbala event in 680 (but this is secondary information). And than the word “caliphate” became synonymous with “Sultan” (Whose original meaning was something like “divine evidence”) and became the ownership of whoever was strong enough to claim it. This is why many Muslim scholars refer to all the “caliph’s” who came after Ali as “Meliki-Adud” (kingdom of oppressors).
But this is the purely intellectual approach. I am a part of those who believe that perhaps not all the messages of holy books is meant to be understood by all the readers at any given time. I don’t know if the creation of a secular state with high moral values would haven truly realistic in the 7th century AD. One possibility is that each generation has to reinterpret the original message according with the existing realities of its time. (or that’s my theory).
On Moses: The magicians see him as a usurper who wants the riches of the Nile and they secretly tell the pharaoh “this is a great magician” (hypnotist, liar, propagandist) who only aims to conquer the worldly possessions of the pharaoh (because the pharaoh says in one place “Am I not greater than him? Why didn’t his God give him any worldly riches and power if he is as great as he is?” And before the 7 curses of Egypt (plague, famine, frogs etc…) Moses prays to God and say “Extingish the wealth and worldly power of the Pharaoh”. Because The Pharaoh has convictions but has no spiritual understanding. He perceives greatness in wealth, military power and magic (power to fool and manipulate the masses). And Moses is been given two miracles on is is shiny white hand that he pulls out of his clothes (I don’t know if this one is present in the Biblical version). This is just like the white hand of truth prevailing over the darkness of lies and the second is (as you know) His stick who devours the serpents of the magician (like the truth devouring lies when it is clearly being demonstrated to even the strongest believers in lies).
But I agree with you. The story might also be purely allegorical. Intellectuals say that it is the message that is being conveyed matters rather than historical correlations. The first message is just my theory.
And here is an example of my theory. (A’Raf 35/7) 141 says: “….They (the pharaoh and his entourage) were killing your boys, were maintaining a hand on the body of your women….”
I said that the meaning of this verse cannot be birth control or even contraception. Because if I am correct and the story is taking place in the 13th century BC. There were only very limited methods of contraception at the time whose effect were only partial. Even condoms made of animal digestive systems did not appear before the 1700’s (of our era). There are records of abortion practices in antiquity in wikipedia but the same page is saying that abortions in hospital environments in the early 1800’s had a death rate of 30%. Truly efficient medical procedures didn’t start (in the developed world) before the end of the 19th century. Abortion pills were not invented before the 1930’s and real methods of contraception (like contraception pills) were only commercialize din the 60’s and 70’s.
So what is the pharaohs hand doing on the body of women?
- I think that the holy book is telling us that “conservative / theocratic rulers want as many children as possible. They don’t like the very idea that women can have control over their own bodies. And they want absolute control over male and female bodies just as they have control over male and female minds”
(Taha 45/20- Verses 71-73): “The pharaoh said: “Did you dare to believe (this magician = Moses) without first asking for my permission?... I will cut you hand and your feet and hang you on a date tree. Then you will know whose punishment is greater His (God’s) or mine…”
I cannot explain the pharaoh having a hand on the female uterus in another way (because the same thing is being mentioned in one or two other places). He is said to be treating women badly and to do inappropriate things to them. Yet “having a hand on the female body” is probably to be interpreted literally: “He has a hand on the female body” as in “controlling the female body in order to control society as a whole”.
One modern example of this from the 25th of November:
https://www.duvarenglish.com/police-crack-down-on-womens-rights-marches-in-turkey-news-61574
One modern example of this from the 25th of November:
- Similar scenes were repeated today. In the second video on the website on female demonstrator is heard yelling “Why won’t you let us pass? What could we possibly do to you?”
What do you think he would say if I asked “The Great One” “What could those women do to you? Why won’t you let them march for their right to live (basically)?”
Simple: Theocratic leaders don’t like the idea. They have (and have always had) this obsession with the female body and they cannot leave it alone on its own.
