Moses PROVED to be a fraud, but...?

[Cerrone]

I've heard of this before. Of the 42 in the rubik of the 125th chapter of the book of the dead you'd think that they'd be compleely inclusive of a generalized set of 10. I find strong similarities between "Thou shall not steal" and "I have not stolen" as well as lying and coveting another man's wife and murder. I see no correlation for having no other God before me, using God's name in vain, keeping the sabbath, or making likemesses of God. The former group being the basest of common sense regardless of what timeframe you've lived in. Collectively our own individual sense of right and wrong have agreed ,for long before popular religious inceptions, that these are bad things to do to each other. The latter finds no purpose unless you're forming a religion around a single diety. I can not comment on his motives, I wasn't there and I see nothing unethical about the commandments you're speaking about. Regardless of the initial reasoning are they not good personal rules to better your life?

Thats the one, the 42 Commandments, Book of the Dead. The obviously worded similarities jump out at you at once, but granted Moses' version has many removed or reworded to suit the activities of his followers. As I see it, the basic commandments for keeping people passive and subservient are there, but the other commandments he removed; such as commiting fraud or judging people hastily, or taking milk from the mouth of a child are as significant and there would have no reason to remove them- if Moses' and his slave followers were interested in social harmony and justice as the egyptians were.

The link below is a quick comparision I was able to find.
http://www.aerobiologicalengineering.com/wxk116/Maat/

Are they not personal rules? They're manipulative rules that've been brutually enforced rules for nearly 2000 years designed perhaps originally to create some order for Moses' followers in a new land, but later adopted by the romans and used as a way to control people. I see it very simply in that for these near 2000 years under horrific christian manipulation, the poor man has worked for his King, his lord, his employer and has striven to be pious and obey the rules that the church has told him to do. He believes he'll live his life in "honest poverty" and grinding labour, and for his life of slavery he'll be rewarded when he dies, meanwhile the Kings and the lords have known of the same rules, but chosen to use their actions only for their own gratification and to exploit their subjects.

Christianity to me is propaganda deisgned to keep the masses humble and servile while the people in power do as they please, and it always has been.

There is no evidence for large-scale "slavery" in Egypt before the Hellenistic period. The Egyptian word for slave ( Hm ) pronounced "Hem?" can also be used for "servant." Egyptian building projects were done using a corvee labor system

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corv%C3%A9e

in which the commons was kept busy outside of the growing season.

There is a theory known to scholars - if not fundies - that ancient writings tell us more about the times in which the authors lived as opposed to the times they claim to be discussing. It would be consistent with this theory that these so-called holy books were actually written well into the Persian/Hellenistic period when slavery was common.

In the 16th century BC an Egyptian ruler named Ahmose (look closely at that name) defeated the Hyksos and chased them back to Canaan. He thus set the stage for 4 centuries of Egyptian domination of Canaan...a dominion they lost to the Phoenicians and Philistines, not the Israelites. Ahmose. Moses? Too close to be a coincidence.

Yes those are all true, the egyptians did have some slaves (as we would use the word today) though, prisoners of war or those who'd surrendered in battle for example, just as many other cultures did at the time.

Taking about Egyptian rulers, something I found particularly interesting with Nefertiti's husband Akhenaten was his clash with the established egyptian religion- but more specifically how he abolished the word "amun" signifying the priesthood and the temples, and replacing it with "aten", placing himself as the representative of the gods in the sense that he was the only divine being on the planet and that the tributes should go to himself and not the priests. However after his death and Nefertitis disputed two year reign, the famous boy king Tutankhamun takes the throne- and changes the last part of his name Aten, to Amun which signifies the return to the established religion. The Aten revolution was brief but it seems to have been popular, the priesthood at the time being considered corrupt and Akhenaten was supported by the people and the army in shifting the balance of tributes from the priests to himself. But after his death a lot of his writings and monuments were defaced by the priests, and word Aten outlawed.

But what I find interesting in the above, is whether one would consider the prayer word "Amen" to be originated in Amun or Aten?