Rand Flem-Ath, the Atlantis/Antarctica guy, has published THE MURDER OF MOSES: HOW AN EGYPTIAN MAGICIAN ASSASSINATED MOSES, STOLE HIS IDENTITY, AND HIJACKED THE EXODUS. This is 90% speculation, but a heck of a yarn. He gives a fascinating account of the ancient use of masks and puppetry to perpetrate a god-hoax. Most of the maneuvers of Reuel as Moses make sense even if there was no impersonation.
I'd also like to mention OEDIPUS AND AKHENATON by Immanuel Velikovsky, the book that first drew me into this. He suggests that the Royal Court of Amarna was the true setting for Oedipus dramas. It's racy fun to project his mapping of the players to the family of Moses.
I am a big fan of the Flem-Ath Atlantis / pole shift theory, but this magician assassin theory seems a reach to me, given all the monkey business that went on in the 18th and 19th Dynasties.
For our discussions on Velikovsky's Oedipus:
But theologically, the god Yahweh represents the Egyptian god Seth. When the Egyptians invented the Jewish religion as a propaganda tool to control the Canaanites, the conflation of the name Yahweh onto the god Seth was part of the identity scam.
Theologically, especially in moral terms, compared to Seth's relationship to Osirus and Horus, and thus the later Satan.
It's also important to realize that archaeology has revealed that Yahweh communities were interspersed peacefully amongst other Canaanite 'Ba'al' communities for a significant period of time, because the actual transitional process wasn't exactly how the Bible wanted us to believe.
I hope you don't mind my dredging up old threads, but From Cleo is getting pretty long and wandery.
Yes, Berbers, Basques and other current life issues have gotten me off track. Hopefully I'll get that back on track soon.
As I understand, Yah was junior to Baal in the Canaanite pantheon and corresponded to Dionysus as well as Seth. Yah was popular as a war god with various peoples that had come into the Levant as he was easy to 'syncretize' with their tribal gods. Evidently, there came a transition with the old god El retiring in favor of Baal with Yah moving up into the secondary role. This would make Yah a good vehicle for an outside agency looking to take over. If Yah merged with El, then Baal would be outflanked.
Generally yes. It's interesting that El represented the Father in Heaven relationship to his various earthly sons and daughters. As such, the process of distilling things down to El and Yahweh ... and eventually the two becoming equated in the various OT 'doublets', seems to me to be very similar to Jesus being the Son on Earth to his Heavenly Father (Yahweh/El).
And so, yes, I generally think this is how Ba'al and his other siblings got aced out. The Canaanite sea god, Yam, of course, merely got reduced in status through clever literary means. And, in becoming a sweet potato I guess.
I've been reading Margaret Barker's THE GREAT ANGEL: A STUDY OF ISRAEL'S SECOND GOD, where she looks at all the manifestations of God in early Jewish sources. Her conclusion is that they saw a great creator God ruling above and an emissary God who descended to earth. El (Elyon) was the supreme god of heaven, while Yah was his presence below. Yah was often seen as having male and female sides. The returning Deuteronomists brought back a singular male deity and attempted to enforce it on the population, but a separate Yah persisted in a messianic undercurrent into the Christian era.
Yes, this is a good book. Here's what we said:
The gradual transition of religious form can also be seen when reading the Old Testament, or Tanakh. The oldest texts acknowledge the existence of all the polytheistic gods, but the focus gradually shifts jealously to the ‘one’ real god, confusingly known by several names. The plural elohim were originally part of the wider Canaanite pantheon. Yahweh was possibly a rank outsider, mirroring Abraham’s insinuation into Canaan. (For more on Judaic polytheism, also see Margaret Barker, The Great Angel: A Study of Israel’s Second God). The rise to the top by this junior sibling god is echoed in the Judaic narratives of Jacob and Joseph, among others. These were younger brothers who also arose to prominence, defying cultural norms of primogeniture.
The triumphs of younger brothers like Jacob and Joseph may also be taken as a metaphor for the otherwise odd (fictive) rise of Israel and Judea. In reality, the two regions had been relative backwaters and vassals to their much more powerful neighbors. While some might see this as something akin to a divine version of The Beverly Hillbillies, where the anointing ‘oil’ of God was bestowed on seemingly unlikely beneficiaries, we rather see it as further evidence of elite human planning. From the failed Amarna experiment, the elites learned that the imposition of monotheism was not a quick and easy thing. Thus, Palestine’s circumstances and geographical positioning (in the politically convenient middle of nowhere) was ideal for such a project.
If the takeover is coming from the displaced Yahuds of Egypt, then they are going to need a replacement for Aton. (I think these are the religious masterminds Barbiero is calling the family of Moses.) Where do they obtain bonafides as Yahwists? From Reuel, the Kenite priest of Midian. They can now sheep-dip Joshua as the army of Yah and proceed with the conquest. Soon we encounter Melchizedek, another mysterious foreigner with a special relationship with Yah.
Yes, and the Aton is craftily honored as Adonai. Yes, these may indeed be Barbiero's 'family' of Moses, more loosely speaking that what seemed to be Barbiero's more literal appearing take. This priesthood would have eventually dispersed amongst the Canaanites, acting as political agents provocateur (neocons and neoliberals
), likely helping to foment the collapse of the Late Bronze Age.
This is also what happened with the Jesuits in the immediate years before the American Revolution, when the Jesuits were 'disestablished' by the Church. They became disbursed into the French Grand Orient Freemasonry, the Bavarian Illuminati, and made alliance with the American Protestant colonists cum revolutionaries (as the enemy of my enemy is my friend). Then after ~40 years in the metaphorical Wilderness they were restored to the good graces of the Church.
You make a good case for a veiled elite utilizing religion to take power. I think we can see it clearly in these events and again in the launch of Christianity. What are your thoughts about their origins? Could this be a global elite, a remnant of an early high civilization?
Yes, it is my opinion that all of this represents a continuous thread, and that the growing evidence is now undeniable that at least one prior global civilization existed and was knocked back to the stone age. Mainstrean Science is now admitting that 'modern' humans have existed for at least 300K years, so what were they up to, besides acting like boorish cavemen?