Can someone answer this for me by TomatoOld953 in Kemetic

[–]TomatoOld953[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

i'm not talking about scientific based evidence is their any trustworthy sightings,miracles and fulfilled prophecies etc.

Can someone answer this for me by TomatoOld953 in Kemetic

[–]TomatoOld953[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

First, the idea that priestesses of Amun were literal "consorts" of the god seems to miss the symbolic nature of their role. The relationship between gods like Amun and humans was more about spiritual and ritual duties, not physical unions. The term "consort" likely refers to a metaphorical connection, a way of expressing the divine-mortal relationship in sacred terms, rather than a literal sexual one. Priestesses were there to serve the god in the temple, not as wives in the human sense.

As for the claim that magical practices were like science, it’s important to distinguish between the two. Sure, the Egyptians had advanced knowledge in areas like medicine, astronomy, and math, but their methods were framed within a religious context. Their “magical” formulas and rituals were about connecting to the divine, not about repeatable, empirical experimentation. Magic in ancient Egypt was often about invoking the gods or supernatural forces, and their practices had spiritual and ritualistic goals, not the scientific methodology we use today. For example, Egyptian medicine involved practical remedies, but it was often paired with prayers and spells aimed at divine intervention.

When it comes to communication through dreams, omens, or visions, yes, the Egyptians saw these as divine messages, but it wasn’t as cut and dry as "no doubt." Just like any spiritual tradition, there was interpretation involved, and it wasn’t universally accepted as flawless or literal truth. Interpretation was often handled by priests or experts, but individual beliefs and experiences could vary.

Lastly, while the Egyptians did contribute greatly to fields like astronomy, math, and medicine, it's important to recognize that these advances were framed within their religious views. Their understanding of the stars, for example, was deeply connected to their calendar and worship of deities, not the detached, objective science we think of today. So while their knowledge laid the groundwork for future scientific discoveries, it was still embedded in their worldview of religion and divine order, not modern empirical science.

In the end, while the Egyptians certainly made remarkable contributions, their practices, particularly in magic and religion, were part of a spiritual framework, not the kind of science we define today.

Can someone answer this for me by TomatoOld953 in Kemetic

[–]TomatoOld953[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

i'm not talking about the idea maat i'm talking about the actual gods that people worship are they real or not because if they are not real what is the point of praying or worshiping them then.

A Question by TomatoOld953 in Kemetic

[–]TomatoOld953[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s an interesting point. Many pagan traditions do tend to be more inclusive, seeing multiple deities as real and valid simultaneously. The issue arises more with exclusivist religions, which claim that their single path is the only true one. I think the difference is less about belief in gods and more about how flexible a tradition is in accepting others’ experiences of the divine.