Baptism is the immersion of someone in a body of water. Anointing is the act of pouring oil on someone's head. They are not the same act, though analogous. I think solid evidence would be needed to draw a connection between the two rituals. For example, you say that this anointing is "what the Egyptians long called "KRST'ing". This would serve as at least a loose connection, but I need to be sure that this is not just another modern myth told among modern authors. Do you happen to know if this is found in the ancient evidence?
is informative.
To anoint is to pour or smear with perfumed oil, milk, water, melted butter or other substances, a process employed ritually by many religions. People and things are anointed to symbolize the introduction of a sacramental or divine influence, a holy emanation, spirit, power or God. It can also be seen as a spiritual mode of ridding persons and things of dangerous influences...Many early apocryphal and Gnostic texts indicate that anointing was part of the baptismal process, and in fact that the baptism with water (John's baptism) is incomplete. The Gospel of Philip states; "The Chrism is superior to baptism, for it is from the word "Chrism" that we have been called "Christians", certainly not because of the word "baptism." And it from the "Chrism" that the "Christ" has his name. For the Father anointed the Son, and the Son anointed the apostles, and the apostles anointed us. He who has been anointed possesses everything. He possesses the Resurrection, the Light, the Cross, the Holy Spirit. The Father gave him this in the bridal chamber, he merely accepted the gift. The Father was in the Son and the Son in the Father. This is the Kingdom of Heaven." In the Acts of Thomas the anointing is in fact the beginning of the baptismal process and essential to becoming a "Christian." It claims that God knows his own children by his seal, and that we shall receive the seal by the oil. Many such baptisms/Chrismations are described in detail throughout the text.
on KRST, the Egyptian term for anoint which provided the etymological origin of the term Christ.
D.M. Murdock wrote:
You guys are amusing! It's always nice to have an intelligent conversation about these fascinating topics, so once again I appreciate this opportunity very much.
I wanted to share with you what was one of the hardest nuts to crack - and one of the most fascinating, which is why I spent hours upon hours working on it. (Representing the culmination, of course, of years and decades of research.
)
Osiris the Christ?The particular nugget in my book
Christ in Egypt that I nearly killed myself mining was the Christ-KRST comparison, as found in the "Truth, Light and Good Shepherd" chapter. Of course, this similarity between the titles "Christ" and "KRST" or "Karast," etc., represents one of the controversial contentions made by various mythicists of prior ages. Admittedly, it was not easy to find, but neither was the original key that allowed for the translation of the Egyptian hieroglyphs in the first place: To wit, the Rosetta Stone, excavated out of the ground in Egypt by Napoleon's troops. One of my sources, in fact, is the main decoder of the hieroglyphs and translator of the Rosetta Stone, the French linguist Champollion.
On pp. 313-9, I go into a detailed discussion of the Egyptian word transliterated as "krst," "karast," "krst, "qeres-t," "qrst," etc., providing the Egyptian hieroglyphs. As I say there:
Quote:
Not only is Osiris the “Lord of Truth,” the “good shepherd” and “sin-bearer,” but, as the “lord of the tomb,” he was essentially also called “Christ,” since one Egyptian term for “tomb,” “funeral,” “dead body” or “mummy” is qrst, likewise transliterated as krst, karast, qeres-t, qrs.t and qrst.
I then relate the contentions about this issue made by lay Egyptologist Gerald Massey. As I'm sure you or I have stated elsewhere in this forum thread, in
CIE I discuss the work of
Gerald Massey, which has received so much interest in the past few years. In my article, I show that his work was indeed peer-reviewed by some of the most renowned Egyptologists, Assyriologists and archaeologists of his day. In any event, there are only a certain few contentions about the Horus-Jesus connection to which I must turn to Massey for exegesis, and these too can be upheld in significant part. (For a further discussion, see my article "
Who is Gerald Massey?," an excerpt from
CIE.)
Says Massey:
Quote:
We now proceed to show that Christ the anointed is none other than the Osiris-karast, and that the karast mummy risen to its feet as Osiris-sahu was the prototypal Christ. Unhappily these demonstrations cannot be made without a wearisome mass of detail.... Dr. Budge, in his book on the mummy, tells his readers that the Egyptian word for mummy is ges, which signifies to wrap up in bandages…. [The word] ges or kes, to embalm the corpse or make the mummy, is a reduced or abraded form of an earlier word, karas (whence krst for the mummy). The original word written in hieroglyphics is ---- krst, whence kas, to embalm, to bandage, to knot, to make the mummy or karast (Birch, Dictionary of the Hieroglyphics, pp. 415-416; Champollion, Gram. Egyptienne, 86). The word krs denotes the embalmment of the mummy, and the krst, as the mummy, was made in the process of preparation by purifying, anointing, and embalming. To karas the dead body was to embalm it, to bandage it, to make the mummy. The mummy was the Osirian Corpus Christi, prepared for burial as the laid-out dead, the karast by name. When raised to its feet, it was the risen mummy, or sahu. The place of embalmment was likewise the krs. Thus the process of making the mummy was to karas, the place in which it was laid is the karas, and the product was the krst, whose image is the upright mummy=the risen Christ. Hence, the name of the Christ, Christos in Greek, Chrestus in Latin, for the anointed, was derived…from the Egyptian word krst….
Say what you will or believe what you may, there is no other origin for Christ the anointed than for Horus the karast or anointed son of god the father. There is no other origin for a Messiah as the anointed than for the Masu or anointed....
Massey's difficulty here when he declares, "Unhappily these demonstrations cannot be made without a wearisome mass of detail," is that of any serious scientific researcher, who must prove a thesis that has hitherto remained unproved. If all facts were readily available in neat little packages, without need for further investigation, examination and research, then we would already know them, and scientists, scholars and researchers would be out of a job. In any case, the problem here and elsewhere is one of things not necessarily represented concretely in the written record, clearly spelled out and readily available. Hence, exegesis is necessary. Indeed, the mere existence of the word "
exegesis" reflects the problem of the scientist, scholar and researcher to come up with concrete theories.
Such tediousness is why I spent some eight pages on this subject! This information was not neatly laid out in an easily accessible text from an approved source. It was scattered here and there in texts that were difficult to track down, obtain and read from authorities in other lands and eras, in a variety of languages. Hence, this book has some 2,400 citations - talk about a "wearisome mass of detail!" Moreover, I had to learn some Egyptian on the spot in order to find the various relevant words, which I then cited meticulously. (Like everyone else, I am not omniscient and do not know every language on Earth, but I am fortunate to be able to learn what I need when I encounter a new one - and there are many new ones to encounter, with thousands worldwide.)
Citing authorities such as Champollion, Birch, Budge and others, I discuss how the Egyptian word
krst and its linguistic relatives refer to the burial, embalmment and mummy, which is why this term krst is associated with Osiris, the god of the underworld.
Hieroglyph, signifying KRST or Mummy
(Champollion, Grammaire Egyptienne, 80)
(Birch, Dictionary of Hieroglyphics, 316)As we discover, the mummy - the deceased as "the Osiris" - is anointed for burial, a sacred ritual essentially the same as baptism, both of which are for purification. The anointing of the mummy constitutes its purification in order to pass into the desired afterlife. The Osiris is anointed = Osiris is KRST. In my book I go into detail about how Osiris and Horus are often interchangeable, as one's death gives rise to the other's birth, with the cycle endlessly repeated. I also explain more about the purification of the dead, the baptism provided by the beheaded Anubis the purifier.
As there are in other chapters and subsections, there's a very interesting back story to this fascinating development, which is the history of the world's first Egyptian hieroglyphic dictionary, that of Dr. Samuel Birch - one of Massey's friends and mentors - who in the 1840s endeavored to organize and publish every Egyptian inscription in the British Museum. With great difficulty, including that there existed no hieroglyph font for the printers of the time, his book was published - in the back of the fifth volume of Bunsen's Egyptian chronology. Because Bunsen had died, interest in his work waned, and the volume went of print quickly. Scholars like Budge were compelled to visit the British Library in order to access what was clearly a highly valuable and important collection but which had been left by the wayside. We can see from this story how facts and theories can require a "wearisome mass of detail."
It was a great deal of work, but what I eventually dug up turned out to be fascinating!
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
