The Account of Moses


Who was Moses as an Historical Figure? We all know Moses as a Biblical figure, often considered “God's Greatest Prophet”, but are many of our preconceived notions actually true?

All of us know Moses as a Biblical character, but who was Moses in a historical sense, and who were the Pharaohs of the Exodus account? Moses wrote the 1st five books of the bible known as the Pentateuch, but where did he get the ideas for Genesis? My personal interest in Moses as a historic figure rather than a Biblical figure was nurtured, after reading hundreds of translated Sumerian clay texts. The similarity between Moses account of creation,the Earth and Man's beginning, and the Sumerian ancient text cannot be denied. Was the Pentateuch then inspired from God, as we were all taught, or did Moses simply transcribe these earlier accounts? My interest really grew after reading of an important ancient King of the Akkadians, that history seems so eagerly to forget. This Kings account of his own childhood, is almost word for word transcribed, into the Book of Exodus. Now my interest has been sparked, where I want to find out who Moses really was, and not what Moses and others would have us believe. The following is the condensed result.

The Sumerians, who lived in the lower Mesopotamian valley, were the first humans to have a written language. They wrote about everyday life on their clay tablets, but also wrote a series of tablets called the creation tablets. They wrote that Man was formed of clay and the women was formed from his rib. They wrote about man's search for everlasting life, and the tree of knowledge, with an evil snake that tried to gain control of the tree. The "Garden of Eden" comes from the Sumerian word “Gu-Edina”, which means Banks of Eden, a fertile valley between two Sumerian cities. This valley is near the city of Eridu, mans first city, where it's burial mounds can still be seen today in southern Iraq. The original account on a clay tablet of Noah and the great flood, can be viewed in the Royal British Museum in London. All these accounts were written over 2500 years before Moses wrote the book of Genesis, so how was it that Moses account is a carbon copy of these clay tablets?




The original story of Noah in cuneiform.

Translated as: "After the flood had swept over the land, and waves and windstorms had rocked the huge boat for seven days and seven nights,"

The famous cuneiform text discovered by Smith working for the British Museum records the epic story of the Tower of Babel.

Translated as: "Their strong place (tower) all the day they founded;
to their strong place in the night
entirely he made an end.
In his anger also word thus he poured out:
[to] scatter abroad he set his face
he gave this? command, their counsel was confused"
All these well known accounts of early man, were NOT original Bible accounts, but were Sumerian. Accounts that Moses was very familiar with.

Moses came from a royal setting and had access to the worlds greatest libraries in his education process. These libraries from the Sumerians were world famous, and even up to Alexander the Greats time, they were well known, so Alexander after seeing the libraries in Babylon, he decided to build his own, in Egypt, at the city of Alexandria. Moses in his day, would have had full access to the complete written record of the Sumerians, along with the early Egyptian writings, including Books of the Dead and their many early papyrus writings.




Fig12. Above, the city of Eridu, considered one of the five pre-flood cities, exists today in southern Iraq, using an aerial photo. Notice how flat the land is, and how difficult it would be to defend. Cities without water, become abandoned.

The question is, should it bother us today that Moses plagiarized the creation account? The Assyrians and the Babylonians plagiarized the Sumerian accounts almost word for word, so should it bother us that Moses did the same? It doesn't bother me that Moses copied the creation account, though it may effect others. It does affect my faith when Moses writes himself in, as a central figure in the Bible. This act is quite different. Moses did far more than plagiarize the creation account. He manipulated many accounts including his own life story.

In the Nineveh tablets, it speaks of a Great King, called Sargon. The text is in the first person, as if Sargon is speaking. “ My mother a high priestess conceived me, in secret she brought me forth. She placed me in a basket of reeds, she closed my entrance with bitumen, she cast me upon the river.” He tells of his birth, which is illegitimate from a royal priestess. He never knows his father, but his mother is ashamed and makes a basket out of reeds, which she puts her baby in, then seals the cover with bitumen. She then puts the basket in the Euphrates river, near the palace, where the palace gardener finds him. Sargon himself says he is the son of a gardener. Before long, Sargon is chief cup holder to the King, and then through a series of events becomes King. From that point on Sargon starts a war of domination over the entire Fertile Crescent. Moses also would have studied Sargon, who was well respected and admired in ancient times, particularity by the Babylonians who saw him as a prototype, of kingdom building.

In Moses own account in Exodus 2:1-3 it compares as, “But when she could hide him no longer, she got a papyrus basket for him and coated it with tar and pitch. Then she placed the child in it and put it among the reeds along the bank of the Nile.” Notice the account of Sargon and the Bibles account of Moses are exactly the same, even the the use of bitumen on the reed basket is the same, with the only difference being the river Euphrates being exchanged for Nile.

Was Moses to quick to transcribe Sargon's birth account without fully aware that bitumen does not exist in the Nile delta? The lower Sumer valley, today known as Kuwait, has a large supply of bitumen that seeps through the ground, from Kuwait's large oil deposits. The ancients used this heat source to smelter copper, gold and their most sought after metal, bismuth, which they mined in the neighbouring regions. Ancient people in the area also used bitumen as mortar in their temple construction.

Contrary to Moses account, bitumen does not exist in the Nile river or the Nile delta. In Moses haste to plagiarize Sargon's birth account he failed to realize that the Nile and the Euphrates have a different geology. A simple mistake, but with huge ramifications.

Moses really saw himself, and his life, as Sargon. The question is, why would Moses see Sargon as his alter ego, and why would Moses try to deceive those reading the Book of Exodus, relating to his birth, and history? Did Moses assume that by using these Sumerian accounts, the Hebrews would have no knowledge of Sumerian history, or be able to read, Sumerian text, therefore not question it's authenticity? Hence they would actually believe that Moses was the originator of these accounts. Rather presumptuous on his part, to assume that mankind would not eventually discover the real source of the Pentateuch. To answer this we must find out who Moses really was in a historical sense.

A number of Pharaohs have been identified as the Pharaoh of the Exodus, but only one Pharaoh, can be both identified by time line and historical fact, and that is Amenhotep 3rd.

In the bible, it tells of 2 storage cities that are built by the Hebrews, and the city Raamses is both mentioned in the bible's account and is listed in Amenhotep 3rds. burial site, as one of his achievements. Raamses was a city built from clay bricks, in the Goshen, the north eastern section of the Nile delta, where the Hebrews resided.

What gives further proof, that Amenhotep 3rd was the Pharaoh of Exodus, is that Amenhotep's first son and heir to the throne, Crown Prince Thutmose, or Thotmosis, disappears from Egyptian records shortly after rising to manhood. His name Thut-moses, means born of Thut, or begot of Thut. This was also the same name that his grandfather was called.

Moses was an Egyptian name, not a Hebrew name, as most Jews and Christians would suggest. The Egyptian name Ramsses, given to a number of Pharaohs, was also derived from this same root name. Ra being the “Sun God”, and msses meaning “born of”, is the same root as moses, as in Thutmosis.

In Exodus 2:19 it says Moses was an Egyptian, not a Hebrew. In the presence of close family members the Crown Prince, may certainly have been called by a pet name, Moses. The question is, what happened to Moses? There has never been found a burial site of the crown prince, extremely odd for the Egyptians, or any mention of his accomplishments. Amenhotep 3rd was really a family man, including in many reliefs his 4 daughters, but never including the crown prince. The answer to the crown prince history and seeming disappearance, can be found in the bible's account.

Crown Prince, Moses, said he had committed a murder. It would have had to be a very grievous act for a crown prince to be banished from his family and Egypt. Moses tells his motive in the Bible, but can he be believed? Murder as an act of sedition or murder against the priesthood, would be a case for banishment. No one really will ever know, but Moses had to flee Egypt. Upon fleeing Egypt, Moses marries a non Hebrew, an Ethiopian woman, as Numbers 12:1 tells us, but what gives further proof that Moses was not a Hebrew, was that he did not circumcise his son, as Exodus 4:18 tells us, and circumcision is a very important part of being Jewish. The general view of Moses, the Charlton Heston from the movie "The Ten Commandments", could not be further from the truth. Moses mother was part Nubian, and he would have had a very dark complexion if not black. His wife from Ethiopia, would also have been very dark complected.

Upon hearing that the ruling Pharaoh had died, Moses returns to Egypt, but why would he return? For one reason and one reason only. To regain his lawful right as heir to the throne of Egypt, only to find his younger brother, Akhenaten was now Pharaoh. Now we know why Moses would have chosen Sargon as his alter-ego. Both men were banished by their fathers, neither Sargon's father or Moses father would accept them. Both had their mothers cast them into the darkness, forsaken and rejected. Sargon would rise to become King of a world power, and it is this position that Moses desired. To regain his position as Pharaoh of Egypt, the world power of the known world.

{Exodus, Finding the Exact Date Blog}

In Exodus 7:7 is says that Moses was 80 yrs old when he approached Pharaoh. It would of taken some time to have an entire nation to leave Egypt, cross a desert, come to Mt Sinai, write the Ten Commandments,where they camped for nearly 2 years, then journey with a nation of tens of thousand, with flocks of sheep and goats to the land of Canaan. Abraham before them, did not take the direct desert route, but followed the fertile crescent, so flocks could be pastured and watered and families could rest. Would Moses leading a far larger group, follow the coast, then travel up the fertile crescent? This would have added an additional 5 years to the trip. Then after arriving at the borders of Canaan, the Israelites turned back into the desert to wander for 40 years. Moses then returned to a mountain overlooking the land of "milk and honey" and died, never crossing the river Jordan. Moses would have had to be well over 130 years old at his death, if all this were true. No man in Moses time nor in our time, has ever lived to 150 years. A great King of the Israel once said, only the strong live 3 score and ten. The question is, what part of this story is misleading or false?

Moses must have been very disappointed to see his brother as Pharaoh, a position he should have held. Why did Moses never mention the Pharaoh's name? He says in the Bible that he personally knows all the royal family, so why not mention their names? A past that he wishes to keep hidden. In the Bible's account in Exodus Chapter 7, it also tells of Moses with a speech impediment, so that a translator is used in place of Moses, when speaking to the Pharaoh. There was never a mention previously that Moses had a speech problem, so was this an attempt by Moses to hide his voice from Egypt's inner court and the Pharaoh's family, so that he would not be identified. Moses could change his appearance so as not to be recognized, but he could not alter his voice. Were all these just attempts to hide his true identity from the new Pharaoh and ultimately the Hebrews?

After finding his younger brother as Pharaoh, Moses would have been devastated, but what would be his recourse? As Crown Prince both Moses and his younger brother would have had the world's best education. The Crown Prince of Egypt would have been taught at Thebes, the history and many languages, written and spoken, of the surrounding nations. The art of war, and how neighbouring nations were equipped and their primary method of war. The geography and the ancient routes of trade and the many passes, that required passage for invading armies, would have been taught. Religion and customs of not just Egypt but of the many nations in the immediate area were all taught to the Crown Princes of Egypt. Egypt believed and was one of the foremost reasons Egypt existed as a powerful nation for centuries, was that all it's Pharaohs should be the most educated men on earth. Another reason for Egypt's fast rise to world power, was that Egypt had horses. Horses did not exist in the early Mesopotamian valley. Chariots, four wheeled, were pulled by a large species of the donkey, in early Sumeria. Horses existed in North Africa and in Spain, where Egypt had a clear military advantage in there use. Horses against donkeys could be likened to a German Tiger against an American Sherman.

No offence but wat u wrote up dere will take time, times and half a time 4 someone to read finish, sorri can't read dis Methuselah

Interesting read... My interest is there reason why I struggled to read through, even fell asleep woke up and continued...

Learn how to write articles like this, take them one after the other, do not cluster everything at once else it becomes prosaic...

Hmmm a lot to unravel.

Superb article, I've thought about this before but never in this way.


Can you mail me a copy of the book you're reading.

lovely read... you should continue.
knowledge doesn't make one an unbeliever. I av enjoyed it so far

people are begining to see the lite 'illumina' and the whole truth will unfold before our eyes someday soon

Thanks people i posted it from here: http://trueancienthistory..com.ng/2013/05/was-book-of-genesis-just-cheap-copy-of.html

Is the Bible historically accurate?

The Genesis part of Bible lists 10 generations from Adam, its first man, to Noah, who escaped a deluge, and states of these 10 generations to cover thousands of years. It would be really naive to believe that these ten generations actually lived for that many years. So, the ‘mathematical’ statements of the Bible such as [“Shem was born to Noah when Noah was 500 years old”, “Adam died at an age of 930 years”] or such as the one that says that there were 480 years between the beginning of the Exodus and the start of construction of Solomon's temple are completely erroneous and can be ignored right at the outset.

From the deciphered cuneiform tablets available from the extensive clay tablets library of Ashur Banipal and as also dug up from around Eridu (modern-day Abu Shahrein, Iraq), the oldest of Sumerian cities, we now know the ancient Sumerian texts such as the Eridu Genesis, the Epic of Gilgamesh and the list of Sumerian kings. By going through these texts that precede the Biblical texts by thousands of years, any half-intelligent man can tell that the Genesis of Bible is nothing but a rehash of these Sumerian accounts. So, Adam of Bible seems to be fashioned after Alulim, the first Mesopotamian king (at Eridu) who descended from the heavens (the mountains), just as Noah seems be fashioned after Ziusudra/Utnapishtim, during whose time a deluge was caused by the waters of Euphrates River. Even from after Noah, up to Abraham, Bible gives 10 generations that span hundreds of years. So, the list from Adam to Noah in the Genesis is nothing but only a later forgery to lend some antiquity to the Bible and is a copy of an early Sumerian lineage (Alulim to Utnapishtim). It is simply prefixed to a possibly-real genealogy from Shem up to Abraham.

The Sumerians, who lived in the lower Mesopotamian valley, were the first humans to have a written language. They wrote about everyday life on their clay tablets, but also wrote a series of tablets called the creation tablets. They wrote that Man was formed of clay and the women was formed from his rib. They wrote about man's search for everlasting life, and the tree of knowledge, with an evil snake that tried to gain control of the tree. The "Garden of Eden" comes from the Sumerian word “Gu-Edina”, which means Banks of Eden, a fertile valley between two Sumerian cities. This valley is near the city of Eridu, mans first city, where it's burial mounds can still be seen today in southern Iraq. The original account on a clay tablet of Noah and the great flood, can be viewed in the Royal British Museum in London. All these accounts were written over 2500 years before Moses wrote the book of Genesis, so how was it that Moses account is a carbon copy of these clay tablets?

The question for us today is; Why do we continue to believe the Bibles account regarding early occurrences in Egypt? The simple fact is the Bible's account up until the 19th century was our only source of knowledge into the ancient world. The Egyptian hieroglyphs were not understood and deciphered until then, and the Sumerian text even later, up until the 1930's. In fact the Sumerian civilization was not discovered or even known about until the mid eighteen hundreds. Moses record of man's early existence was our sole source of knowledge. In effect Moses was able to keep the truth from all of us, simply because of our inability to read ancient text. In brief, Moses had been correct. He could transcribe early Egyptian and Sumerian text word for word, and these accounts would be believed as “words from God”, for thousands of years.

What is even more profound, is that these earlier writing, are now seen as mostly ancient myths, that carry little or no weight, on human history, while the plagiarized Bible's accounts are seen as the truth. The case in point is the history of the Sumerian king, Sargon, whose history has been purposely buried and hidden by Christian and Jewish scholars, because that history would prove the Bible's account as false and misleading. A cruel irony of fate.

LoE



Another of the gods record of the flood..
The God Enki gives his own record.

He made it clear that he and the other gods were visitors on Earth but created man as their slave workers for gold digging.

How the first city Eridu was made and populated...
How man was created from already existing animals through genetic engineering....
How men grow faster and die faster...
How the gods colonized men....
Even the record of Cain and Abel in the Bible had it's LoE version.....

How the gods mixed their Gene with men and even had children with men.....
How the gods continue to leave the Earth but some dying off in various conflicts....
The gods exploration of Kingu(moon and even Mars)....

Been years i read that account though but it's as boring and interesting as fvck... Most of his words usage makes me think his latest scribe Zechariah Stitchen is a yaba left candidate.

But after going through many other books of the gods and finding many similarities, i Drew one conclusion....

Just like Lord Enki made it clear that they taught the flood affected everything on Tiamat until they found people already exiled from their city steal living very far off,....
I feel the gods too are limited to only what they know. None knows it all...
Not Enki (he never claimed Almighty), not Enlil, not Marduk, not Mazda, not Allah, not Yahweh, not Zeus, not Odin, not all our African gods....

They're all limited to what they know. The First Cause, The Primordial Programmer of All Energies has never concerned himself/itself/herself-whatever suits it, with all these petty squabbles especially Yahweh and Allah gets themselves into. (i just don't know what's wrong with the two of them )

Life is bigger than all these over Sabi Bible soldiers.. The Bible can't be from the First Cause. It's a hard pill swallow but that's the fact.....

zeestunner:
people are begining to see the lite 'illumina' and the whole truth will unfold before our eyes someday soon

The whole truth is already here and it will be here forever.https://www.nairaland.com/2938907/doctrine-ufos

Moses did not write the law, (genesis to Deuteronomy), it was written by possibly Ezra, modern scholarship puts it at 570-530bc, just after the Babylonian exiles, when the creator of all (Lord Marduk) asked king Cyrus to free everyone after they have all learnt who the real God and creator of all was..
The bible is not a history text book, it is a spiritual manual...in other words an oracle..at least the first part..the second part is just Roman fabrication.

Jesse01:
No offence but wat u wrote up dere will take time, times and half a time 4 someone to read finish, sorri can't read dis Methuselah

guy u u wicked methuse wat?