I noticed that the faces were shown.
They weren't even skulls but actual faces with appearance of life and flesh, yet they were stone. Eyes were open and soft tissues with no appearance of decomposition. Not many other body parts although there was a conspicuous phallic symbol. Reproductive organs are common with idols .
All of these would be expected to be displayed in conspicuous locations if idols. I think many of the larger ones may have had some natural slope or hole/ impression that the artists decided to modify and add to make the rest of the heads. I have seen a lot of petrified wood, but in archaeological digs soft tissue is not as common, especially flesh of animals. Many of these were large images of men. That's what were usually depicted as gods. You'll still see these today in Buddhist and Hindu shrines.
They weren't even skulls but actual faces with appearance of life and flesh, yet they were stone. Eyes were open and soft tissues with no appearance of decomposition. Not many other body parts although there was a conspicuous phallic symbol. Reproductive organs are common with idols .
All of these would be expected to be displayed in conspicuous locations if idols. I think many of the larger ones may have had some natural slope or hole/ impression that the artists decided to modify and add to make the rest of the heads. I have seen a lot of petrified wood, but in archaeological digs soft tissue is not as common, especially flesh of animals. Many of these were large images of men. That's what were usually depicted as gods. You'll still see these today in Buddhist and Hindu shrines.
Numbers 13:33 New King James Version (NKJV) There we saw the giants (the descendants of Anak came from the giants); and we were like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we were in their sight.” So there were real giants, right? That's not to say all these are them though.
-
1
- Show all