Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

[_ Old Earth _] Sphinx - Flood Victim?

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$905.00
Goal
$1,038.00
J

JakTak

Guest
The Great Sphinx has been officially dated as being built about 10,500 bc

Scientists working through a publically funded program have concluded that the Great Sphinx and surrounding area was submerged under water at some point.

The Great Sphinx's stones, under close scrutiny and through scientific study during the last 4 years, have been classified as rain-and-water-worn. Furthur research has proven that during the time before and near after 10,500 bc, Egypt was very fertile and had one of the worlds largest rainfall records.

The pyramids that surround the area of the Sphinx are now under study in an attempt to confirm this theory. What does this have to do with Creation/Evolution?

1) If this turned out true and there was sufficient evidence on public record, then how could anyone not believe there was a Big Flood, or at least that an entire continent was under water. (Just 12,000 years ago but AFTER somebody built the sphinx and pyramids)

2) If it is true, then you have yet another argument for Creationists and the Flood. AND according to Kent Hovind, if people were larger and stronger before the flood, this would explain how the massive stones were moved, or at least an idea.

3) As a creative person, an idea formed in my own head. Is Egypt the actual civilization that legend has turned into Atlantis? I'm not saying this happened, it's just an idea. Sounds believable to me. A huge civilization, thriving, great temples, etc.. Wiped out by The Flood.

----------

I tend to believe the TV show I watched. It was on PBS-KLRU which is the central Texas public television network. I think it was on Nova, but I can't promise that. Anyway, my main reason for posting this is to see what you think. So without slamming revolts into my face, just let me know where you stand on this idea. I'm just a messenger.
 
I remembered this part after posting and it wouldn't let me edit for some reason. Anyway, sorry for posting again.

-------

When they dated the sphinx it was originally dated to be anywhere between 11,000 and 9,000 bc. During research they stumbled upon an idea which lead to 10,500 bc.

Somewhere between 10,503 and 10,490 bc, the alignment of the stars were in such a pattern that the CAT sign (I honestly don't know it's name) but for which the Sphinx was obviously designed after, was DIRECTLY in front of the Sphinx's face on the horizon. This has never happened since and will not happen again until 2908, according to calculations.

It may or may not have any relevance, but anyone who knows the Egyptians, they were really into astrological signs, gods, etc... They chose 10,500 as middle ground between the astrology dates. But remember that they had also placed it in this time frame because of the water thing and when the area experienced heavy rainfall.
 
Well you've piqued my curiosity. Have you any details?
 
I'm trying to find everything I can about it. I'll post on the subject again when I am more informative. I was fixing a leak in the kitchen sink when it came on and got in trouble cause I was watching it instead of fixing the leak :lol:
 
The core of the sphinx itself is an outcropping of natural rock. It is aligned in the direction that the outcropping happened to form. The Egyptians, rather than move it, chose to sculpt it into something.
 
Schoch was the guy from the show I saw so it was interesting to find a page with him on it. He was only there to show evidence of the rain-wear and date stuff. There was another guy who said he thought it could've been underwater.

Schoch's basic evaluation of the sphinx is that it was built before the Egyptian dynasty, when according to current historical studies, is the time when people were still hunters and gatherers. Also that it was built right before or after the last Ice Age.

Schoch's website and Sphinx evidence:
http://www.robertschoch.topcities.com
http://www.robertschoch.topcities.com/a ... phinx.html

Disproving Schoch's idea:
http://www.catchpenny.org/sphinx.html
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/3499/sphinx.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/3499/sphinx.htm said:
He agreed with West's conclusion regarding the water erosion,and remarked that it was due to the torrential rains pouring down on Egypt's monuments at that time,so why are there no other water erosions found in Egypt to validate his theory? Surely there wasn't just a cloud raining down on the Sphinx?

Non-biased reading:
http://members.aol.com/davidpb4/sphinx1.html

I haven't found any sites with 'proof' or 'evidence' for the sphinx being under water, but I'm still looking. I suspect it was only the guest scientists' theory of what might have happened. I'm trying to find the specific name of the show. It wasn't Nova.
 
Robert Buvaul, the scientist which is also referenced from the http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/3499/sphinx.htm page. Which was googled as disproving Schoch's idea but is really not very biased.

He is the one who explained the astrological stuff:
----------

In 1989 I published a paper in the Oxford Journal, Discussions In Egyptology (vol. 13), in which I demonstrated that the three Great Pyramids and their relative position to the Nile created on the ground a sort of 3-D 'hologram' of the three stars of Orion's belt and their relative position to the Milky Way. To support this contention, I brought into evidence the inclined shaft in the Great Pyramid which were aimed at the south meridian towards these group of stars as well as written evidence from the Pyramid Texts that identified the afterlife destiny of the pyramid-kings with Orion.

Later in my book The Orion Mystery (Heinemann-Mandarin) I also demonstrated that the best fit for the Giza Pyramids/Nile pattern with the Orion's belt/Milky Way pattern occurred when the sky was pushed back in time (i.e. precessed) to the epoch of 10,500 BC. There were good reasons for doing so.

The ancient Egyptians, for example, constantly refer to a remote golden age they called Zep Tepi, 'The First Time' of Osiris, which they believed had long predated the Pyramid Age. Osiris was Orion, and the Great Pyramid had a shaft directed to Orion at the meridian. To me, this 'silent' astro-architectural language seemed to be spelling out 'here is Osiris in the sky when these pyramids were built, yet know, too, that his origins are rooted in the First Time.' But The 'First Time' of what? How could the stars of Orion have a 'First Time'?

Well they can. And they do. Provided, of course, that you can read through the allegorical 'language' of the ancients via the symbolic architecture and the related Pyramid Texts. Allegory, to put it in another way, is the 'Q-Basics' of the master astronomers who designed the Giza complex. When the stars of Orion are observed at the meridian in the precise manner that the ancient Egyptian astronomers did over many centuries, the could not help noting that these stars crossed the south meridian at different altitudes at different epoch. This is, of course, due to the phenomenon of Precession (see The Orion Mystery, appendices 1 and 2). In short, the stars of Orion can be said to have a starting point or 'beginning' at the nadir of their precessional cycle. Simple calculations show that this occurred in 10,500 BC. Could the ancient astronomers of the Pyramid Age have used their very clever 'silent language' combined with Precession to freeze the 'First Time' of Osiris - somewhat like the gifted architects of gothic cathedral froze in its allegorical stonework the 'time of Christ'?

In the summer of 1993 Graham Hancock and I got together to investigate this issue further. Graham was quick to realised the important implications this approach could have on the Sphinx problem. He had a hunch that the curious harking back to the epoch of 10,500 BC by the pyramid builders of Giza was an invitation by them to consider the actual age of the Sphinx. If this hypothesis was correct, then the Sphinx must be an 'original' time-marker of that remote epoch using an obvious celestial tag valid for 10,500 BC. But which tag? What could the Sphinx be representing that was in the sky? Could this have something to do with the due east direction of its gaze towards the horizon?

In his ground-breaking book Fingerprints of the Gods (Heinemann-Mandarin), Hancock pointed out that the 'First Time' date of 10,500 BC also denoted the beginning or 'First Time' of the Age of Leo. This was when the 'lion' constellation would have risen heliacally (at dawn before the sun) on the day of the spring (vernal) equinox. This event brought the celestial lion to rest due east, thus in perfect alignment with the Sphinx. The Sphinx, in other words, was made to look at his own image in the horizon - and consequently at his own 'time'. Hancock pointed out that 10,500 BC was no random date. It very precisely denoted another beginning, that of Orion-Osiris defined on the ground with the pattern and alignments of the nearby Pyramids. Here, then, were not just the Pyramids but also the Sphinx luring us to the same date of 10,500 BC. But were we dealing with a 'coincidence' -albeit an astonishing one- or was all this part of a deliberate long term scheme set by the ancients? Could it be possible that some blueprint was put into motion in 10,500 BC with the making of the Sphinx then to be completed much later by the builders of the Pyramids? Was there evidence of a continuous presence here at Giza through the ages of some master 'astronomers' who could have been responsible to see this scheme through?

If so, who were they? Where had they come from? Why here at Giza? Graham and I have spent the last two years researching this fascinating issue. We believe that what we have uncovered will change the perceptions of what Giza was (and still is) forever. The full results of our investigation, as you might have guessed, are laid out in our new book, Keeper of Genesis, available now at a discount through AA&ES. Suffice at this stage to say that author Colin Wilson, who gave the book an early review, thinks it's 'a much more satisfying tour de force' than Fingerprints of the Gods or The Orion Mystery.
 
The Barbarian said:
The core of the sphinx itself is an outcropping of natural rock. It is aligned in the direction that the outcropping happened to form. The Egyptians, rather than move it, chose to sculpt it into something.

It may well be an outcropping and has just about been proven, but that would be astonishingly coincidental that it happens to face the constellation of the lion.

There is also evidence to suggest that it was not just an outcropping, such as how come there is nothing to show it was carved out. But all signs do point to it being carved out of the limestone which was already at the site.
 
Most of the body was carved from the rock on the site. Which means it is a natural outcroppoing. The fact that it faces one way or another is meaningless.
 
The Barbarian said:
The fact that it faces one way or another is meaningless.

The fact that the Statue of Liberty looks out across the bay is meaningless?

I was under the impression that it sure meant something to all those people who came to America in the last century. Just because it's 13,000 years old doesn't mean this piece of evidence is meaningless.

The Sphinx is a cat with a pharoh's head. It also happens to match up architecturally WITH the kitty constelation(Leo) for which it is presumed to be modeled after and which the Sphinx was facing. Coincidence or not.

Just because it is your opinion that it is meaningless doesn't make it so. I'm presenting an idea for us to openly discuss, theorize, and learn. So, please tell me why you think it is meaningless instead of a two sentence general answer that holds no water besides your own opinion.

To refute your general answer are these key pieces of evidence: All in the Sphinx region are writings that praise the Leo constellation. Is it just coincidence that these people honor the great cat as a god and just decided to carve out a giant kitty that just happened to face the constellation of Leo?

The egyptians honored many gods and looked to the stars for questions and answers, astrologists you may say. Now where is the evidence to suggest it is meaningless, besides your own opinionated assumption? So there was an outcropping and they carved it, I'll accept that, but they could've faced it any direction. Just so happens it makes a perfect triangle for which the Sphinx heads and faced directly into the Leo constellation.
 
10,500 years, eh? I wonder what the margin of error is.

As my metrology prof always said, "If you don't know your measurement uncertainty, your measurements are meaningless."
 
You do have a point Pearly Gator, I've only been into this for 3 days now so I can't say I'm a genius.

I'm sure Schoch, Buvaul, and the other scientists may be able to answer the 'margin of error' question. I'm going to look at half-priced books this coming weekend :lol:
 
Back
Top