As a unifying principle Tutankhaten converted to Amunism and changed his name to Tutankhamun; driven by the xenophobic doctrine of the Atenists, was for this infraction slain by his father’s high priest, Panehesy (Pinhas; Phinehas), Old Testament reference: the ‘wicked priest.’
The identification of Tutankhamun as the prototypical Christian Jesus is the most contentious point in Ahmed Osman’s writings. Being conditioned by traditional Christianity and Christian teaching coming from our “forged” Biblical texts we are not accustomed to the “truth” and read unsuspecting what we have inherited from Rome as the “Gospel Truth” never realizing that we don’t have it; that is until you begin to dedicate yourself to studying men like Osman, Gadalla, and Jackson and many others who have come to see how this son of Akhenaten (the Biblical Moses), Tutankhamun, is the key figure in the attempted peace between the Atenists and the Amun-Ra Priesthood. As such we come to see how sadly and tragically he was slain for such efforts at reconciliation at Sinai and hung on a tree. As such, Osman calls Tutankhamun the “original Jesus”, the “slain savior-messiah” and the prototype for all other and later “Jesus figures”. He sees this “Jesus figure” in the Essene’s Teacher of Righteousness at Qumran as detailed in the Dead Sea Scrolls, who is also killed, and is identified usually as Jeshu ben Pandira whom many see as the “pre-Jesus” historical figure. In Hebrew “Ben” means “son of”, and Pandira is not a Hebrew word, but an ancient Egyptian royal title, as “Pa-ntr-ra”, or “Pa-neter-ra”, Son of Ra, and not surprisingly one of the titles of Akhenaten, and carried on much later as “Sol Invictus” by Constantine.
The word “Jesus” is interchangeable with the word “Joshua” and that they both basically mean the same things; namely “salvation, or savior.”
The Joshua of the Old Testament and the Roman Jesus are both representations of Egypt’s slain boy King, Tutankaten, Moses’ son.
As Lash points out in: Not in His Image the Zaddikite sect, standing in the shadow of the mysterious character Melchizedek, took the names of historical figures, strangely transported them forward in time to play out new iterations of the same old movie. We see this attempt revealed in ‘The Templar Revelation: Secret Guardians of the True Identity of Christ’ authors Lynn Picknett & Clive Prince, who argue that John the Baptist was to fill the shoes of the new resurrected Tutankaten, but the the creators of the Christian religion had other ideas. I also suspect that maybe the Zaddikites were old, hard-line remnants of Atenists, generational waves, spawned in the wake of Akhenaten’s fleeing Egypt, washed up into the caves of Qumran. But, because of what Saint Paul did, non of this really matters. The radical ideologies of Zaddikim live under the Christian tent, are its foundations. And the victors re-write the history.
Focusing on the words “Joshua” and “Jesus”; Osman, correctly identifies Tutankhamun as the “historical Joshua”, son of Nun (fish), the successor of Moses in the Hebrew story. It would appear from the Egyptian records that Joshua, like Jeshu, is a variant of Jesus, and in the first Christian centuries, many authorities referred to Joshua as Jesus.
The cause of these radical distortions of history Osman believes to have been the Hebrews’ desire first to conceal their connection with the Egyptians and then to cover up the fact that their priest-king had been killed at all, let alone by one of them. In fact, the condition of Tutankhamen’s mummy, with many broken bones and a severed head, shows he was tortured as well, then hanged. Yet it still exhibited “a refined and cultured face” and a “serene and placid countenance” (Osman, The House of the Messiah, p. 140).
Phinehas/Phineas turns up in various scriptures. The Talmudic rabbis claimed that “Pinhas killed Jesus” (Osman, The House of the Messiah, p. 176) and the Qumran Essenes identified him as “the Wicked Priest” who persecuted and killed the Teacher of Righteousness (Osman, The House of the Messiah, p. 76, F.M. Cross Jr. The Ancient Library of Qumran , pub. Doubleday, N.Y. 1958, pp 107-116).
Historians, looking back from the perspective of a Christian culture, regard Akhenaten as “the first monotheist”, when in fact, however, Akhenaten externalized the Egyptian mysteries to a level where the visible sun disc became the object of veneration, with the representative of that object becoming Akhenaten himself. Although the name Aten was used for the visible disc of the sun, in truth, Aten—earlier Atum– was the Egyptian term for the Absolute, the impersonal principle behind all manifestations, as was the Tetragrammaton: YHWH in its original meaning, esoteric in both cases. This was the real reason for the contentious hostility of the other priests toward Akhenaten and all later followers and Atenists. They worried that the betrayal of the esoteric would only release untold horrors if such lofty abstractions became concretized down into the material plane, through the actions of perverse minds with ill intent.
Ancient Egyptian theism was always internally monocular, but because of Akhenaten, the high priest, Panehesy/Phinehas, being internally blind; understood only the exoteric, perceived Tutankhamun’s actions in accepting a multiplicity of paths to the source as idolatrous, killed Tutankhamun as a result of these selfish impressions: that the young pharaoh was no longer upholding the primacy of Aten.
Tutankhamun’s restoring the Amun-Ra Priesthood and reopening the temples in Egypt, actions were looked upon by the Atenist Priest as blasphemous deserving of death. Thus on the eve of the Passover, Phinehas killed Tutankhamun in the Tabernacle at the foot of Mount Sinai. The killing was avenged by the slaughter of thousands of Israelites, including Phinehas, at the hands of Ephraim (Aye), the second son of Joseph the Patriarch and the death of so many is “covered-up” by a plague story in the Old Testament.
For this was he killed and to cover up such a murder by his “own” people he was represented as “Joshua/Jesus” and given a life through traditions that carried him into Canaan and the conquering of this land in later writings of the Hebrew’s Scriptures.
It was the death of John the Baptist many centuries later that persuaded the Essene leaders, who had been awaiting the Second Coming of their “Christ as a judge at the end of the world”, to claim that they had witnessed “Jesus” in the person of their Teacher of Righteousness, thus allowing the evangelists to retell the story of “the Christ” adapted to the time of Herod the Great and Pontius Pilate.
There is not a shred of contemporary evidence to support the New Testament story that Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great and was condemned to death in the first century AD. when Pontius Pilate (26-36 AD.) was the procurator of Judaea, which had become a Roman province. On the other hand, there is a mass of evidence that points to the fact that this “Jesus” lived many centuries earlier. For instance, the Dead Sea Scrolls, which pre-date the Gospels, contain an account of the Annunciation couched in the same words we find in St Luke and make it clear that the Essenes believed that the Messiah (their Teacher of Righteousness) had already lived and died at the hands of the Wicked Priest, and they were awaiting his Second Coming, not the first.
The cover-up continues today, because there are just too many big egos with vested interests, with too many irons in the fire, who wish not to have their apple carts tipped over. The Theban High Priests were correct in their perception of the untold horrors such blindness was to release.
The evidence of violent trauma to Tutankhamun’s skull, chest and other skeletal components are quickly dispensed with by conjuring up stories from tomb robbers to the boy King having been crushed within the jaws of a hippopotamus when tossed from his chariot while out hunting, or pointing the incriminating finger at all of the ‘usual’ suspects; all, that is, except the obvious one over there. Especially suspect should be when such pronouncements emanate from the credentialed, self-promoting Egyptologist, movie star Zahi Hawass, who shamelessly displays a cultured zeal when it comes to abandoning facts in favor of dispensing propaganda in the name of pride.
Tutankhamen’s tomb was finished in haste and loaded with treasures. When it was found by Howard Carter some 3000 years later, it was the only royal tomb found virtually intact. The mummy of the boy-king still lay in its gold mummy case within a stone sarcophagus untouched.
With Carter’s meticulous documentation of each artifact brought to light, Carter himself had begun to connect a few dots of his own and at one point, when threatened of being pulled off the site by Egypt’s newly installed head of antiquities, Pierre Lacau, a French Jesuit, Carter fired back with his own ominous warning, that he would then reveal the true nature of the Exodus. (Tutankhamun – The Untold Story by Thomas Hoving)