With all due respect to the other answers, there is a very simple reason why the pyramids are not mentioned in the Old Testament. It’s the same reason that the Old Testament doesn’t mention the Grand Canyon or the Great Wall of China: none of the action of the Old Testament takes place at or near the Giza plateau. The closest the Hebrews ever came to the pyramids (in the biblical narrative) were the cities of Pi-Ramses and Pithom, roughly 80 miles north of the Great Pyramid.
–
If the Biblical account of the Exodus is to be believed historically (it isn’t by most scholars) the Israelites were being held captive in Egypt sometime between 1500–1200 BC.
The pyramids of Giza were built at least 1000 years before that (2580–2560 BC).
The writers of the Bible had no knowledge whatsoever of how or when they were built. Even in the ancient world the pyramids were regarded as ancient and mysterious.
—
·
An ancient Egyptian mummified head displayed in a school library in Australia now has a fresh face, thanks to a meticulous scientific reconstruction.
The ancient object is something of a mystery — it’s unclear how it arrived at Grafton High School in northern New South Wales, about 300 miles (480 kilometers) north of Sydney, and a century-old note with it only said it was from a “genuine” Egyptian mummy. But it will now be displayed beside 3D-printed sculptures based on medical scans and forensic techniques, to show the reconstruction process and what the person would have looked like when they were alive.
There are in fact dozens of pyramids in Egypt, but to turn the question around, why should be building of any of them be mentioned? Contrary to post-Biblical legend, Jews did not participate in the construction of the pyramids. The Egyptians had pretty much given up on building such things by the time the Israelites appeared. That pretty much puts their construction outside of the scope of Christian and Jewish scriptures.
·
My best guess would be because the giant, gaudy tombs of dead Egyptian kings were not very relevant to the story and because the Old Testament was never intended to be an atlas or traveler’s guide to the ancient world.
As a side note (to answer some of the other answers), it also wasn’t intended to be a science textbook or to be used against the advancement of scientific knowledge, especially when such knowledge replaces benighted ignorance, tradition, or error. To deify a book written by mankind, however inspired they may have been, to such an extent that you are unable to accept greater truth when it arrives (knowing that all truth emanates from the God of Truth himself and the rejection of a truth is, by extension, the rejection of Him) is a form of idolatry that has led our people from one darkness to another for most of our existence and was the principal cause behind the murder of Jesus Christ.
Furthermore, if read carefully, the Old Testament does not have to be interpreted to contradict known science, either. For example, the Genesis story both says that the world was created in 6 days (Gen 1:31, 2:2) and then refers to this process as, and I quote, “the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens”. Generations do not happen in a single 24-hour day (though the idiomatic word ‘day’ often refers to time periods, such as ‘back in my day’ or ‘in that day and time’, rather than an staunchly-literal 24-hour period of time). As for Creation and the word “generations” being referenced together in the Bible… well, I don’t think you need me to spell that out for you. 🙂
The same is true for the flood story. People like to take the word “earth” and capitalize it (to change the meaning of the word to refer to the whole planet). It wasn’t referring to the planet as we now understand it because this concept was likely not even known at the time. (How would the author have known the entire planet was flooded? Did he Google Earth it or check the weather satellite network that would later be named after him? Of course not. We must assume the author was writing from his limited perspective, since it is not stated that he saw the whole planet underwater.) The word originally referred to the land around their civilization (likely a land-locked civilization, given their lack of boats that could survive a deluge). If the flood waters had covered the whole planet, then they wouldn’t have found any olive branches, since olive trees take 3 years to grow, to say nothing of other food for the animals (which would not grown immediately after the land had been inundated with salty sea water). Most likely, they were driven by flood waters into the open ocean and drifted for nearly a year on oceanic currents until they ended up in the Mediterranean area, or, if you prefer a scriptural phrasing, they were “swept off”. None of this need contradict evolution nor the origins of life on Earth. The Bible doesn’t specifically contradict or confirm such things. Arrogant, ignorant, idolatrous people simply try to make it do so because they want to drum up a cause to profiteer on (like the idea of the Rapture, which is also not scriptural and is a purposeful misinterpretation of passages referring to quite the opposite, and the concept of the Rapture was created solely to sell televangelists’ books).
17.3K views
·
The pyramids have little to do with either Moses or Cleopatra. Even if you recognize Moses as a historical character, he would have lived around 1500 BCE at the earliest, which is up to 1000+ years after the big Gizeh pyramids were built. And Cleopatra is far younger still, living in the first century BCE.
The great age of the pyramids is not always appreciated. When the Romans saw them, they were already ancient. Cleopatra was further removed from the time the pyramids were built than we are removed from Cleopatra today!