What do you think?
Rate this book
Eden in Egypt
Adam and Eve were Pharaoh Akhenaton and Nefertiti.
The Bible says that a river flowed through the Garden of Eden and then split into four branches. There is only one river in the Near East that does exactly this, and that is the long oasis-garden of the Nile valley and its division into the (originally) four branches of the Nile Delta.
This observation takes Ralph into the depths of the Genesis account, and it would seem that Adam and Eve were actually Akhenaton and Nefertiti; and so the Genesis story is actually a distillation of Akhenaton's Hymn to the Aten. Thus the Garden of Eden was originally the Garden of Aten (Akhenaton's god) at Amarna in Middle Egypt.
The book also demonstrates that Hebrew is a direct descendant of the ancient Egyptian language, and that the Bible was written in Egyptian. Sequel to "Tempest & Exodus" and "Solomon, Pharaoh of Egypt"
The Bible says that a river flowed through the Garden of Eden and then split into four branches. There is only one river in the Near East that does exactly this, and that is the long oasis-garden of the Nile valley and its division into the (originally) four branches of the Nile Delta.
This observation takes Ralph into the depths of the Genesis account, and it would seem that Adam and Eve were actually Akhenaton and Nefertiti; and so the Genesis story is actually a distillation of Akhenaton's Hymn to the Aten. Thus the Garden of Eden was originally the Garden of Aten (Akhenaton's god) at Amarna in Middle Egypt.
The book also demonstrates that Hebrew is a direct descendant of the ancient Egyptian language, and that the Bible was written in Egyptian. Sequel to "Tempest & Exodus" and "Solomon, Pharaoh of Egypt"
- GenresPhilosophy
320 pages, Paperback
First published October 1, 2004
14 people are currently reading
99 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
June 29, 2012
Oh, my goodness. Just when I thought Ellis couldn't get worse, he does. The guy comes across like he knows what he's talking about, but then buried deep in his appendices (which not everyone will read) he actually confesses that he doesn't know that much ancient Hebrew. He bases many of his theories on linguistic connections between Egyptian and Hebrew, trying to convince readers that David and Solomon were nothing more than Egyptian pharaohs. He's laughable in that he says that god is an alien from a star. Now, if he had said that "god" or "the gods" were merely technologically advanced humans I could have accepted that, but an alien? Any scrap of credibility he had evaporated.
His logic throughout this series is circular and he repeats his hypothesis ad nauseam and it would appear that he thinks by repeating himself that he sounds more convincing. No. He didn't convince me the first time, and saying it a second time doesn't either. It's not that I"m a mainstream christian and think he's "bound for hell", it's just he makes some very basic errors. For example, he claims that the number 666 in Revelation is related to King Solomon, but NO. It has nothing to do with him; it's a reference to the Emperor Nero. Any first year Religious Studies text would have told him that. I like a good conspiracy and alternative history, but this guy is just way out there.
Why do I continue reading his books? In a word: OCD. I started the series, and well "in for a penny, in for a pound". I'll finish it, as I'm told he gets better, but I highly doubt it.
His logic throughout this series is circular and he repeats his hypothesis ad nauseam and it would appear that he thinks by repeating himself that he sounds more convincing. No. He didn't convince me the first time, and saying it a second time doesn't either. It's not that I"m a mainstream christian and think he's "bound for hell", it's just he makes some very basic errors. For example, he claims that the number 666 in Revelation is related to King Solomon, but NO. It has nothing to do with him; it's a reference to the Emperor Nero. Any first year Religious Studies text would have told him that. I like a good conspiracy and alternative history, but this guy is just way out there.
Why do I continue reading his books? In a word: OCD. I started the series, and well "in for a penny, in for a pound". I'll finish it, as I'm told he gets better, but I highly doubt it.
Displaying 1 of 1 review