The Wars Of The Gods

This is being reposted because more has been added to it. The name has been pluralized from "War Of The Gods" to "Wars Of The Gods".

The Bible began with Moses on Mount Sinai. One of God's Commandments was to have no other gods before Him. Later the Jews built their Temple on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.

Greece arose as a major power. It conquered the Persia that had freed the Jews from captivity in Babylon. The Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar II, had destroyed the Temple and taken the Jews captive to Babylon.

The Greek counterpart to Mount Sinai is Mount Olympus. The chief Greek god on Mount Olympus was Zeus. But this was forbidden to Jews, and later Christians, because of the commandment to have no other gods. The gods on Mount Olympus were believed to interact, and even mate, with humans.

In a town by the base of Mount Olympus a boy was born. His name was Alexander and he was no myth. Alexander would be the greatest conqueror that the world had ever seen. He quickly built a vast empire, conquering and absorbing the Persian Empire. He took Egypt, what is now Israel and Syria. He led his forces far into India. Alexander, as King of Macedon, never lost a battle and more than a few people thought that he was divine.

Alexander himself stated that Zeus was his father.

Alexander founded the city in Egypt that bears his name, Alexandria, and his rule of Egypt is why the three successive pharaohs who built the Pyramids of Giza have both Egyptian and Greek names. Alexander is buried in his namesake city although the exact site of the tomb has been lost.

Alexander personally led his forces. He had much greater plans, including the conquest of western Europe, when he died of a fever at age 32.

But maybe there was something divine going on. In fact, maybe there was a War of the Gods. The Book of Daniel, in the Bible, had foretold four successive empires that would rule the known world. The first was the then-current Babylon. Then came Persia, Greece and Rome. In the Book of Daniel, this was the four empires foretold by both Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the statue in Chapter 2, as well as the four successive beasts in Chapter 7.

As it turned out Alexander died in Babylon, which he planned to revive as his capital, in the palace of Nebuchadnezzar II. This was the same Nebuchadnezzar who had destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple, and taken the Jews into exile.

But if Alexander had not died, and had gone on to his planned conquest of western Europe, that would have forestalled the rise of Rome, which was necessary because it had already been foretold.

Could it be that the God of the Bible brought an end to Alexander, the spiritual son of Zeus, and his conquests, so that the prophecies already made in the Bible would be fulfilled, with Zeus trying to forestall that fulfillment?

Alexander's vast empire did not hold together after his death. It broke into four pieces, with each being led by one of his generals. The Jews, and their Temple, were first ruled by the benign Ptolemaic Dynasty that were ruling Egypt. They were later under the control of the Seleucids, based in what is now Syria.

The four pieces of Alexander's empire, operating separately, were not able to resist the rise of Rome as the next great power.

The plans of Alexander had been curtailed, so that the Bible prophecies could be fulfilled, but the War of the Gods wasn't over yet. Zeus struck back as a Seleucid king named Antiochus IV desecrated the Jews' Temple by installing the worship of Zeus. This led to the Jews regaining their independence in the Maccabean Revolt. The Jewish holiday of Hannukah is a celebration of the rededication of the Temple.

The rise of Rome, the fourth kingdom, ended Seleucid control. The Jews did not like foreign rule. But Rome did usually respect the Jews' religion and Temple, except for the General Pompey, and they were exempt from military service.

But, in the War of the Gods, Zeus wasn't finished yet. The Roman Pantheon of Gods was actually an adaptation of the Greek gods. The Jews rebelled against Roman rule, and the Romans responded by destroying the Temple and Jerusalem, just as the Babylon of Nebuchadnezzar II had done more than six centuries before. The Roman equivalent of Zeus was Jupiter. The Romans rebuilt Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina, with a temple dedicated to Jupiter.

Besides Mounts Sinai and Olympus, there is another mountain involved here. In Rome, the Pantheon was built and dedicated to the Roman gods. The Pantheon is a dome, but with an opening that resembles the crater of a volcano.

Image from Google Earth
 
While the Pantheon was being built in Rome, a real volcano erupted to the south. This famous volcano was known as Vesuvius and the eruption destroyed cities that were known for sin. The devastating eruption took place not long after the Romans had destroyed the Jews' Temple, and sent them into exile, and also after the Romans had martyred the Christian saints Peter and Paul. The Jewish religion had been protected, but the Christians lost that protection when they became separate from the Jews.

The Roman gods were adoptions of the Greek. The city next to the devastating eruption was the largest city originating from a Greek colony in Italy, Neapolis or Naples.

Image from Google Earth

Meanwhile, back in Greece, the Christian St. John was writing the Book of Revelation. This book concludes the Christian Bible and reaffirms the four empires of the Book of Daniel. The empires are all now present or past, except for the future tense of the fourth empire, Rome.

The Book of Revelation describes the "Lake of Fire", and this is reflected in the lava from Mount Vesuvius that destroyed Pompeii.

"The War Of The Gods" isn't over yet. In the Book of Daniel, Chapter 8, we see, in verse 21, that the "first king" is the king of Greece. But his kingdom will be broken apart into four kingdoms. This "first king" is, of course as we saw above, Alexander.

Chapter 8 goes on to describe another great king that will someday arise. This is described as taking place in the distant future. This king will have astounding power. He is described as eventually being destroyed, but not by any human power. Before being destroyed this great king of the future will oppose the "Prince of Princes".

This king of the future is, of course, the Antichrist. The "Prince of Princes" that he will oppose is the Second Coming of Jesus. This is described in other places in the Bible.

What I find to be a very interesting connection between the "first king", Alexander, and the Antichrist is that the kingdom of Alexander ended by being broken apart into multiple kingdoms. While the kingdom of the Antichrist will come from multiple kings giving their authority to him, there will be ten kings in all.

This makes the Antichrist seem to be Alexander coming back together, so that the "War Of The Gods" can continue. This "War Of The Gods", which we see here has been going on since ancient times, will conclude with the Second Coming of Jesus, which will bring the reign of the Antichrist to an end.

The posting on this blog that explains these "End Times" events is "The End Of The World As We Know It". 

THE ALEXANDRIA LINES

Here is something really interesting that I have never seen before. Alexandria is the city that was founded on the Mediterranean coast of Egypt. It is much older than Cairo, which was built by Moslems, and has been a very important city since it's founding. Alexandria was an early center of Christianity.

In Greece, across the Mediterranean from Alexandria, there were two rival centers of power, Athens and Sparta. Many historians believe that Alexandria actually exceeded both Athens and Sparta as the focal point of the Hellenistic Era. 

What I notice is that when Alexander established the city of Alexandria he unwittingly established a measure, both in distance and in a straight line, that would resonate across history. I see three examples of "Alexandria Lines". This is really amazing and has determined where centers of power will be down through history.

If we take the line from Alexandria to Athens, and continue the line in a straight line for about the same distance, it brings us to Venice. If we then continue on in a straight line, again for about the same distance from Alexandria to Athens, it brings us to London. The distance of each segment is just about exactly 1,000 km.

Image from Google Earth

Sparta was a rival center of power in Greece, but the distance from Alexandria to Sparta is just about exactly the same as that from Alexandria to Athens. If we take a line from Alexandria to Sparta, and continue on in a straight line for the same distance again, it brings us to Rome. If we continue the line for the same distance again it brings us to Paris.

Image from Google Earth

There is another line from Alexandria to Constantinople, now called Istanbul. Constantinople is named for the first Roman emperor to convert to Christianity and, after the fall of Rome, was the capital of the Byzantine Empire for a thousand years. 

It was where the Hagia Sophia was located, and was where the Eastern Orthodox Church had split away from the Catholic Church in 1054. Vladimir, Prince of Kievan Rus which was the predecessor state to Russia, Ukraine and, Belarus, had earlier chosen the Byzantine Rite for his people over the Roman Catholic Rite. Constantinople became the natural center of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

But when the Ottomans conquered Constantinople in 1453, renaming it Istanbul, the center of the Eastern Orthodox Church was forced to move. The obvious choice was Kyiv, where Prince Vladimir had baptized his people. Later, the Romanov Dynasty of Russia built their capital city of St. Petersburg. Just as the above examples are of equal distances in a straight line, so it is from Alexandria to Istanbul (Constantinople) to Kyiv to St. Petersburg. The distance is, again, just about exactly 1,000 km.

Image from Google Earth

But Kyiv had been so devastated by an earlier attack by the Mongols that it wouldn't fully recover until the Nineteenth Century. The center of the Eastern Orthodox Church ended up moving to Moscow. The Alexandria Line also applies there, although from Kyiv it is a little bit shorter and not in a perfectly straight line.

Image from Google Earth

ANDERS BRIEVIK AND THE DAYS OF THE WEEK

Anders Breivik is the Norwegian who was convicted of killing dozens of people in Oslo in 2011, first with a truck bomb and then with an assault rifle.

Here is something that I notice about the case that I cannot see referred to anywhere. Maybe it's something that we should give some thought to.

Anders Breivik described his religious beliefs as Odinism. This is the worship of the old Norse God Odin. After the truck bombing he carried into the massacre an assault rifle and a handgun, dressed as a police officer.

On the rifle he had inscribed the name of Odin's spear. Another Norse God was Thor, the God of Thunder who had a hammer. On the pistol he had inscribed the name of Thor's hammer.

This massacre, in what is usually probably the most peaceful and prosperous country in the world, can be attributed to Odinism. In the U.S. the Hammer of Thor is widely used by white supremacist groups.

So we should be horrified by Odinism and want nothing to do with it, right? That is what I want to write about today.

Have you ever wondered where the names of the days of the week come from? It turns out that four of the seven weekdays are named for Odin and associated gods of Norse mythology.

Odin is also spelled "Woden" and Wednesday is named for him. He had a spear and Breivik had the name of his spear inscribed on his assault rifle. This assault rifle that killed so many young people, who approached Breivik for help because he was dressed as a police officer, represented Odin's spear. Yet we have a day of the week named for Odin.

Odin's wife is a goddess named Frigg. She got Friday named for her. The massacre took place on a Friday, but I can't see that anyone drew the connection that the day of the massacre is named for the wife of the God, the name of whose spear was inscribed on the assault rifle.

On the pistol that the gunman carried was inscribed the name of the Hammer of Thor, another Norse God. Thor got Thursday named for him.

Tuesday is named for Tyr, the Norse God of War.

The other three days of the week have names based on astrology. Saturday is named for Saturn, Sunday for the sun, and Monday for the moon.

Has anyone beside me ever thought that we should rename the days of the week? Should Christians, Moslems and, Jews have their days named for heathen, pagan gods and astrological symbols? This doesn't seem right.

What about the Norse settlement of Vinland, in eastern Canada? We know that the Vikings, led by Leif Erikson, were the first Europeans to settle North America. But the settlement didn't last. My understanding is that the Vikings aroused the enmity of the native Indians by killing one of them. Finding themselves heavily outnumbered the Vikings withdrew and it wasn't until five centuries later than Christopher Columbus landed.

Could this be another element of "The Wars Of The Gods"? Satan tried to convert the western hemisphere to these pagan gods but God foiled it and, when the time was right, made sure that it was the message of Christianity that reached the western hemisphere?

This was a step in what I see as God's plan for the native Indians, as we saw in the compound posting, "The Western Hemisphere", section 1) THE LONG VIEW OF THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE.

The widespread symbol of the Three Crowns, that we saw in the posting on this blog, "The Three Crowns And Fleur Dr Lis" April 2022 I have concluded must have originated with the Vikings. But they converted to Christianity and this is not considered as a pagan symbol.

THE TEMPLE IS STILL WITH IS

This section contains subsections.

The world actually forms a tree pattern that leads back to the Temple in Jerusalem. This Temple was central to the story of the Bible, and was destroyed during an uprising against Roman rule in 70 A.D. Here is something that I cannot find has ever been pointed out. Through this tree pattern the Temple is really still with us.

ST. PETER'S SQUARE IS OF THE SAME SHAPE AND DIMENSIONS AS THE COLOSSEUM

Have you ever wondered why St. Peter's Square, at the Vatican, is actually shaped like an oval? Every other square that I can see, both in Italy and just about everywhere else, is literally right-angled in form. So why would this "square" actually be shaped like an oval?

As it turns out there is a simple answer. I cannot find anything about this being documented but am not quite sure whether to believe that I am the only one today that knows this.

St. Peter's Square, inside the Colonnades, is exactly the same size and shape as the Colosseum, which is about 3.5 km away. This is St. Peter's Square. St. Peter's Basilica is to the left so that the two together have the shape of a key, with the oval form of the "square" being the handle of the key.

Image from Google Earth

Here is the Colosseum, shown from the same altitude. Although the directional alignment of the two is not the same, you can right click and select the "Measure Distance" feature to see that the dimensions of the Colosseum are exactly that of the internal diameter of the Colonnades that give St. Peter's Square it's oval form. Part of the structure of the Colosseum along it's long axis is missing but both measure about 190 meters, or 625 feet.

Image from Google Earth

The oval form of both is not an extreme ellipse, the ratio of the long axis to the short axis being about 1.2 or 6/5.

Clearly, St. Peter's Square was constructed to exactly match the Colosseum but this has never been made public.

THE CENTER OF ST. PETER'S SQUARE IS LOCATED EXACTLY ON THE LONG AXIS OF THE COLOSSEUM, AND ALSO THE LATERAN PALACE

There is more to the relationship between St. Peter's Square and the Colosseum. By using the right click and "Measure Distance" option on Google Maps, it draws a straight line between the two points that are clicked on. If we choose the first point as the obelisk in the center of St. Peter's Square and the second point as the far side of the long axis of the Colosseum, the southeastern end, we find something else amazing that has never been made public.

The direction to St. Peter's Square from the Colosseum is exactly along the extension of the long axis of the oval form of the Colosseum.

So St. Peter's Square was not only constructed to match the dimensions of the Colosseum, it was also located to be aligned with the long axis of the Colosseum, although the directional alignment between the two is not the same.

Images from Google Earth

That is not all. The original center of the Catholic Church was not the Vatican, as it is today, but the Lateran Palace. The papacy moved, for some time, to Avignon in southern France. When it returned to Rome, the Lateran Palace had been damaged by fire and was relocated to the Vatican instead. The Lateran Palace is still officially the headquarters of the church.

As it turns out the Lateran Palace is located on the opposite side of the Colosseum, which is from ancient Rome and was built before either, from the Vatican. This means that the Lateran Palace was also located on the extension of the long axis of the Colosseum, but in the opposite direction to that of the Vatican with St. Peter's Square.

The Lateran Palace is a large complex, but that means that we can draw a straight line with the Google Maps "Measure Distance" feature from the obelisk in St. Peter's Square to a point in the Lateran Palace complex, and the line will go right along the long axis of the Colosseum.

But what could these alignments mean? It is reminiscent of the Historical Axis of Paris, but that is no secret. I have searched and searched and cannot find that this alignment in Rome has ever been made public. The Colosseum is the best-known structure from ancient Rome, is the symbol of the modern city of Rome as well as it's geographical center.

It seems clear that this alignment with the Colosseum is an effort by the church to link itself with the power of the Roman Empire, but not to be made public. It could be a symbolic sympathy for those Christians who were martyred by the Roman Empire but it is not clear how many were martyred at the Colosseum, as opposed to the nearby Circus Maximus.

This hidden symbolism supports what we saw in the investigation, "11) SYMBOLISM THEORY OF THE VATICAN AND THE HAGIA SOPHIA, in the compound posting, "Investigations" December 2018.

THE FUNDING TO BUILD THE COLOSSEUM CAME FROM THE WEALTH LOOTED FROM THE TEMPLE

There is another reason for linking the Vatican to the Colosseum. It is well-known that the funding to build the Colosseum came from the wealth that the Romans looted from the Jewish Temple, when they destroyed it in 70 A.D.

Constructing St. Peter's Square so that the obelisk in it's center was aligned with the long axis of the Colosseum, which was built with the wealth taken from the Temple, to the center of the Archbasilica in the Lateral Palace, was the way of making the Vatican the new Temple, even if it was not made public.

The ideal way to accomplish this would, of course, have been to build the Vatican itself with the wealth looted from the Temple. But the Colosseum was built in the First Century, while Christianity was illegal and many Christians would be martyred in the Colosseum. Judaism was a legal religion, but Christians lost that legality when they separated from Judaism by recognizing Jesus as the awaited Messiah.

It was the bones of the martyred St. Peter, the best-known of the Apostles who had actually been with Jesus, over which the Vatican was built, hence the name of St. Peter's Square. Just as it links itself to St. Peter by being built over his bones, it links itself to the Colosseum which was built with the wealth looted from the Temple by this alignment.

But the center of the Archbasilica of St. John (San Giovanni), in the Lateran Palace complex, which is older than the Vatican, and is much closer to the Colosseum, must have also been built so that it was on the long axis of the Colosseum. This was the precedent for centering St. Peter's Square in the same way.

THE OVAL OFFICE IN THE WHITE HOUSE

The only office that I have ever heard of being oval in form is the Oval Office in the White House. Have you ever wondered why the office of the U.S. President would be oval in form? Not only is it oval in form but it's proportions are virtually identical to that of the Colosseum, which was built with the wealth looted from the Temple. In this way the Oval Office is tied to the Temple.

Just as there is the obelisk in St. Peter's Square, which was constructed with exactly the same dimensions as the Colosseum, so there are ovals around the Washington Monument, in Washington D.C., and also the Ellipse, just to the north.

 

Image from Wikipedia article, "Oval Office".

Image from Google Earth

THE CENTER OF THE DOME OF ST. PETER'S IS ON THE AXIS THROUGH THE ARCH OF TITUS

Putting down the Jewish uprising against Roman rule, which resulted in the destruction and looting of the Temple, had not been an easy battle for the Romans. When it was over, the Arch of Titus was built next to the Colosseum, to memorialize the victory. The engravings on the Arch illustrate the wealth being taken from the Temple which went to build the adjacent Colosseum.

Jews who visit Rome are not supposed to walk under the Arch of Titus.

The amazing thing is that there is not only the above described axis, through the long axis of the Colosseum, there is also another axis that runs close-by and parallel to it. The center of the dome of St. Peter's Basilica is located on the axis that runs through the Arch of Titus.

Images from Google Earth

THE ARC DE TRIOMPHE WAS BASED ON THE ARCH OF TITUS

We saw in the compound posting on this blog, "America And The Modern World Explained By Way Of Paris", December 2015, how Paris has been the prototype for cities across the world. 

The centerpiece of Paris is the Arc De Triomphe, a victory arch built by Napoleon. But it was modeled on, and inspired by, the Arch of Titus.

So Paris, which is imitated in so many cities across the world, is centered around the Arc De Triomphe in exactly the same way that Rome is centered around the Colosseum, which was built with the wealth taken from the Jewish Temple when it was destroyed. The Arc De Triomphe is actually modeled on the Arch of Titus, which was built in commemoration of the victory which resulted in the destruction of the Jewish Temple, and depicts the wealth being taken from that Temple which paid for the construction of the Colosseum.

Then we have the alignment. Paris is centered on an alignment, the Historical Axis of Paris or Axe Historique, just as St. Peter's Square and the Archbasilica of the Lateran Palace are aligned along the long axis of the Colosseum and the center of the dome of St. Peter's Basilica is on the axis through the Arch of Titus, which runs parallel to the one through the long axis of the Colosseum.

(Note- The Historical Axis of Paris runs from the statue in the center of the Louvre, through the Arc De Triomphe Du Carrousel, to the obelisk in Place Concorde, through the Arc De Triomphe, to the new Grande Arche. The three arches are in alignment).

THE LINK THROUGH THE FOUR HORSES

Another way that all of this is linked to the world is what we saw in the section 7) FOUR HORSES ALL OVER THE WORLD, in the compound posting "The Aztec Prophecy" April 2018.

This tradition of a statue of four horses actually began with the ones that are in St. Mark's Basilica, in Venice. Those were originally taken from Constantinople, which was established as the capital of the eastern half of the Roman Empire, as Rome was the capital of the western half. 

Napoleon took the four horses from Venice, but then copied them and returned the originals to Venice. Napoleon's copy are the four horses that are atop the Arc De Triomphe Du Carrousel, which is on the Historical Axis of Paris, was built by Napoleon before the larger Arc De Triomphe, and was also modeled on the Arch of Titus.

The bones of St. Mark are in his namesake basilica in Venice, just as the bones of St. Peter are the foundation of his namesake basilica in Rome. St. Mark and St. Peter are closely linked because the first of the Gospels, St. Mark's, was Mark writing for Peter, who was a great speaker but couldn't read or write.

So we have how Paris has influenced the world and the "Four Horses All Over The World" linked back to the destroyed Temple in Jerusalem. 

But the four horses originated with the ones in Constantinople. That is where what would be the largest church in the world for a thousand years was built, after Rome became Christianized. 

THE PARALLEL BRANCHES OF THE TREE THAT LINKS THE WORLD TO THE FORMER TEMPLE IN JERUSALEM

Notice all of the paralleling here. There is the two parallel axes in Rome. There is the link between Paris and Rome. There is the parallel of Venice and Rome, St. Mark and St. Peter, which meets the Rome axes at the four horses atop the Arc De Triomphe Du Carrousel in Paris. There is the parallel between the two capitals of the Roman Empire, east and west, Constantinople and Rome.

The link, on the same axis in Paris, between the Arc De Triomphe, which was based on the Arch of Titus in Rome and which celebrates and depicts the wealth that was looted from the Temple and built the Colosseum, and the Arc De Triomphe Du Carrousel, which hosts Napoleon's copy of the four horses in Venice, that were taken from the former capital of the eastern half of the Roman Empire, represents the link between Rome and Venice, which are also linked by hosting the bones of St. Peter and St. Mark. St. Mark wrote the first Gospel for St. Peter, who couldn't read or write. Venice is linked to the Hagia Sophia because the namesake basilica that hosts both the bones of St. Mark and the original four horses is a copy of it.

There were four horses and also the four empires in the Book of Daniel, the four pieces into which Alexander's empire split and, of course, the "Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse", being written by St. John in the Book of Revelation which foretells the Apocalypse.

Can you see how the world is actually branches of the destroyed Temple that was so important in the story of the Bible? All of these parallels are the branches. The Temple has been destroyed but in this way is still with us.

We have seen the Temple Mount, the semi-artificial hill upon which the last Temple was located in the posting on this blog, "Esau And The Temple Mount", February 2016.

Finally, I find it utterly amazing how the Temple being still with us so much resembles the branches of a tree because we saw in the interpretation of Bible prophecy, 2) THE TREE STUMP AND THE TEMPLE MOUNT in the compound posting "New Insight Into Bible Prophecy" October 2017, that I see the tree stump with the band around it, in the Book of Daniel, as a prophecy of the Temple Mount, which would be built centuries in the future, and would remain after the Temple had been destroyed.

The tree being cut down represents the Temple and that is why the Temple being still with us is in the form of a tree.

EGYPT AND THE EXODUS

Critics claim that there is no evidence that the story of the Exodus, the delivery of the Israelites from bondage in Egypt, actually took place. One side of this story that I have never seen anywhere is what kind of an effect it might have had on the Egyptians. 

If this fantastic story really took place then it must have had some effect on the Egyptians. It seems to me that it did.

What I see as the greatest mystery of ancient Egypt is the era known as the Amarna Period. The name also refers to the "Amarna Letters", letters by the Egyptian leadership during this period to diplomatic posts in other lands.

Egypt was a very polytheistic nation which honored a broad pantheon of gods. Like any other comparable civilization that we can see, Egypt had a god for everything. Many gods, with control over certain aspects of life, were not universal. In one city a request might be made to one god, but the same request would be made to a different god if in another city. Egypt's gods were very important to it, and there was a long and hallowed tradition of how they must be worshiped.

All of a sudden, a new pharaoh comes to the throne, Amenhotep IV. He surprises and dismays all of Egypt by announcing that one god is supreme above all others. He changed his name to Akhenaten to reflect devotion to this one supreme god, which was called Aten.

The new pharaoh destroyed many of the temples of the traditional gods, making many enemies in the process, and built a new capital city to reflect the new era of devotion to his god. The city was called Amarna, which gives it's name to this brief era. This was not exactly monotheism, the old gods of Egypt were still there. But now one of the gods was to be honored far above the others.

The disk of the sun was considered as the manifestation of this one supreme god. The people would actually worship the pharaoh while he worshiped the one supreme god, putting himself in a role somewhat like a high priest or the earthly son of this god.

The position of women in Egypt improved during this time and from it comes the best-known face of ancient Egypt, the bust of Nefertiti. She was the queen of Akhenaten during his great religious reform.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nefertiti#/media/File:Nofretete_Neues_Museum.jpg

But the change of religion did not go over very well at all. It was unpopular with nearly everybody and was reversed just as soon as Akhenaten died. The capital city was moved back to Thebes. The son of Akhenaten was the famed King Tut, short for Tutankhamen. King Tut actually died as a teenager, might have actually been the most insignificant of pharaohs, and you have heard of him only because grave robbers never found his tomb.

Horemheb was the following pharaoh who really reversed the religious reforms. He destroyed the capital city that had been built for the new supreme god, and not much remains of it today. Being childless he appointed his vizier as his successor, who would take the throne as "Ramesses I", as we saw in the posting by that name. This began a new dynasty, the Nineteenth Dynasty.

It is true that there is little historical record of the Exodus from Egypt. But the Egyptians did not like to be defeated, and they were in the habit of selectively recording, and even erasing, parts of their own history. 

We know for sure that a warlike people called the Hyksos conquered and ruled Egypt for a time but there is very little Egyptian record of that. Ramesses II, grandson of Ramesses I, was known as the Great Builder of ancient Egypt, he wanted to be remembered by his endless building, but he is also known to have imposed his cartouche on buildings that others had built.

We have to understand that this is so out of the ordinary, so unique in ancient Egypt that it demands special explanation. No other pharaoh ever attempted anything like this. Akhenaten had all of the makings of a great pharaoh. But he put himself down in the history of his nation as a criminal and heretic. He was buried in a very small tomb and generally scorned after his death. He became essentially a non-person in Egypt and his name is missing from later lists of previous pharaohs. Akhenaten's mummy, nor that of his queen Nefertiti, have even been positively identified. Virtually anything to do with his new religion was destroyed, and his religion of one supreme god forgotten.

What then made him do it? There is a clear explanation that really should get some attention.

What if the story of the Exodus, as told in the Bible, really did happen as told. The Egyptians saw the awesome power of the Israelites' God. While they may not have paid much attention to the religion of their slaves, the Bible records Moses describing their God to the unnamed pharaoh. They knew that the Israelites worshiped only one God. During the Exodus, the Egyptians saw the power of this God.

The Egyptians would not have known the details of their former slaves' religion, this was before the Bible was written, all they knew was that they worshiped only one all-powerful God which, at the time, was a very unique idea.

The timing is right, the Fourteenth Century B.C. We know that King David ruled over Israel around 1000 B.C. Before the Exodus and that time, the Israelites had to go through the long periods of wandering in the wilderness, gradually clearing the land of the Canaanites, and the period when Israel was ruled by leaders known as Judges.

Doesn't it look to you as if the Egyptians, having seen the power of the Israelites' God as described in the Bible, but really not wanting to admit that they and their gods had been defeated by the God of their slaves, had a pharaoh who thought that the best thing for Egypt was to incorporate this one supreme God, and facilitated that as best as he could, even though destroying his own reign and legacy in the process?

He even changed his name to signify his new religious convictions, from Amenhotep IV to Akhenaten, just as Abram had his name changed to Abraham, Sarai to Sarah, and Jacob to Israel.

I see this as the best evidence that the Exodus, as described in the Bible with all of it's miracles, took place just as described. It could not have been that the Egyptians had gotten dissatisfied with the old gods because the country was poor or subject to foreign domination, and sought a new god to change their fortunes, because Egypt was near the height of it's power at the time.

But there is still more to consider.

Of all the hundreds of pharaohs and other important people in the long history of Egypt, two have emerged as the "faces" of old Egypt. These are Nefertiti, as we saw above, and King Tutankhamen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tutankhamun#/media/File:CairoEgMuseumTaaMaskMostlyPhotographed.jpg

Nefertiti was the queen of Akhenaten, the pharaoh who tried to get Egypt worshiping one supreme God, and Tutankhamen was his son. Although Nefertiti was not Tutankhamen's mother. The only other name from Egypt that has any comparison to these two is Ramesses II, who would rule in the following dynasty.

Now, stop and think. Doesn't it strike you as very noteworthy that the two who should emerge as the most familiar faces from Egypt's very long history are the queen and the son of this scorned pharaoh who had tried to get Egypt to abandon it's historic pantheon of gods, in order to worship one supreme God?

King Tutankhamen was actually quite likely the most insignificant of pharaohs. He became king as a child, was in exceptionally poor health, and died in his teens. Decisions during his reign were almost certainly made by advisers, who would succeed Tutankhamen as pharaohs themselves, Ay and Horemheb. The reason that he is so famous today is that, unique among the pharaohs of Egypt, grave robbers never found his tomb before archeologists did in modern times.

Could it be that God arranged it for Tutankhamen and Nefertiti to emerge as the best-known figures of the long history of Egypt to show that the Egyptians had certainly seen the power of the Israelites' God in delivering them from slavery? Even though they were not about to record it, the world could see their reaction to it. This could not have been done for Akhenaten himself because he was scorned upon death, becoming a non-person whose name is missing from later lists of past pharaohs, and was buried in a very modest tomb.

King Tutankhamen, son of Akhenaten, is recorded as going against his father's religious ideas upon succeeding him. In fact, the new king's original name was to have been Tutankhaten, recognizing the one supreme God, but was changed to Tutankhamen, for the original Egyptian gods. But he was a child upon becoming pharaoh and decisions were certainly being made for him.

In the campaign of Horemheb against this new religious idea, the following statue of King Tut and his queen was severely damaged. But yet they have emerged in modern times as the faces of ancient Egypt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tutankhamun#/media/File:Tutankhamun_at_Luxor_temple.jpg 

POSTSCRIPT

Not long after I wrote the above posting came the announcement that an entire ancient city was unearthed in Egypt. The name of the city is Aten. This is certainly one of the most important archeological discoveries ever. It is reminiscent of the excavation of the city of Ur, in Mesopotamia, about a century ago.

The name of the one supreme god, represented by the disk of the sun, was also Aten.

As it turns out the city of Aten was founded by Amenhotep III, who was the father of the pharaoh who tried to move the country toward monotheism. His name was Amenhotep IV but he changed it Akhenaten to in order to reflect the new religious movement.

The city of Aten was in use during the Amarna Period, the time of the move toward monotheism, but the capital was moved to Amarna, hence the name of the period. The son of Akhenaten was the famous King Tut, short for Tutankhamen. Tutankhamen was actually what his name was changed to in order to reflect the move back to the traditional pantheon of gods.

For readers in the Niagara Falls area this took place during the 18th Dynasty of ancient Egypt. Tutankhamen was followed as pharoah by Ay and Horemheb. Horemheb was childless so he appointed his vizier as his successor.

The vizier took the throne as Ramesses I, the first pharaoh of the 19th Dynasty. There was a mummy from Egypt in the museum that used to be just at the Canadian end of the Rainbow Bridge, but the mummy was unidentified. It was later definitely identified to be Ramesses I and was given back to Egypt. The mummy had spent over a hundred years in Niagara Falls.

Possibly the most important pharaoh, at least of the New Kingdom, was Ramesses II, who was the grandson of Ramesses I. He did a lot of building, although not of pyramids. By this time the era of pyramid building, which took place in the Old Kingdom, was long past and the pyramids were already very old.