Question For Non-Christians: Did You Know?

[mymistake]

 

 

Did you know that nothing in Egyptian history ever points to a large mass of Hebrews living there?

That is a fairly easily falsifiable statement.

 

1) Manfred Bietak uncovered multiple buildings with Hebrew styled architecture (the video discusses those findings) in the Hyksos capital of Avaris.

 

2) In addition to these buildings, more than a dozen scarabs with the inscription "Jacob Hr" (translated "rock of Jacob") have been excavated in the Hyksos capital of Avaris, throughout Egypt, and some have even been found scattered throughout the land of Canaan and modern day Israel.

 

To understand the significance of this finding, one needs to understand that a scarab is the equivalent of a modern day police badge.  If your authority came from a Pharaoh, for example, then your scarab would have the Pharaoh's household name inscribed on it.  If your authority came from Joseph or his descendant's (see Genesis 37-50) then your scarab would have been inscribed with something pursuant of the house of Jacob (aka: Israel).

 

3) Furthermore, Brooklyn papyrus 35.1446 is an ancient Egyptian slave transaction document with hundreds of names on it dating to the beginning of the New Kingdom era (just after the Hyksos expulsion from power). More than HALF of the slave's names written on the document are definitely, characteristically, Hebrew.  From a statistician's point of view, this random sampling of slave names is enough to justify stating that "the *majority* of the slaves at the beginning of the New Kingdom era were characteristically Hebrew."

 

This does nothing more than suggest that a community of Hebrews lived in Egypt.  Far from falsifying my statement, it does nothing to speak of the millions of Jews the bible would have us believe were there.

 

 

You didn't know that half of hundreds is millions?  That is why you need the Holy Spirit guiding your thinking.  God's math is mysterious and higher than the math of mere mortals.

[DeadTOm]

What good is *any* belief if what is claimed to be believed doesn't hold water when it is subjected to rigorous testing of any kind?

 

Um... please... show us evidence of the rigorous testing, with reproducible results, which shows that the belief in god does, in fact, "hold water".

 

Your own statement here should be justification enough to stop believing in god. Apparently though, it doesn't work when applied in that direction.

[Ravenstar]

he he.. I have things to do at the moment. But I WILL be back    to deal with this nonsense.

 

[florduh]

Uh oh, Ravenstar on the case. Look out, she knows her material!

[Thurisaz]

 

"Present neutral sources for your claims."

I'm presenting you with what is known as "primary sources." [...]

 

I'll take that as a "I have no sources to quote besides a typical morontheist bullshit video".

 

Well this was a quick one.

 

*PLONK*

 

[Astreja]

Even if there had been a mass migration of Israelites from Egypt... So what? It doesn't support any of the supernatural claims of the Bible, any more than the existence of New York City proves the existence of the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.

[midniterider]

Did you know that the crossing site of the Exodus has been found?  See comment's section of the video to review "holes" people have already attempted to poke.  Feel free to put your thinking cap on, and poke holes as well.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXf2IDS-9g0

 

Look around for Jesus. Doesn't see him.

[midniterider]

 

"Present neutral sources for your claims."

I'm presenting you with what is known as "primary sources."

 

You are familiar with the difference between secondary sources and primary sources. . . yes?

 

Ad lapidem

Ad hominem

Ad novitatem

 

Any sincere thinker would prefer to avoid these fallacies and, instead, stay focused on primary sources. . . 

 

 

Geological evidence. That's nice. Now where is Jesus? I'd like to speak to him. And I'd like him to speak back like other living beings do. Not that fake bullshit imaginary Jesus voice (or feeling) in my head.

[Geezer]

Legends/myths are often based on real events. It is well known that legends/myths were passed on orally. It is also well documented that these stories were subject to a great deal of embellishment with the passing of time. A tribal skirmish could easily evolve into a major war involving massive armies with the passing of time and numerous retelling of the story.

 

I’m sure many here are familiar with the Habiru. I’ve read material where some scholars believe an incident, that had some “similarities” to the Exodus story, involving Habiru mercenaries and the Egyptian army may have been the source that created the Exodus story.

 

Supposedly the Habiru mercenaries were occupying the land of Goshen and became so numerous they were perceived as a threat to the Egyptians. Rather than being allowed to leave the Egyptian army drove them out and chased them into the land of Canaan where they were massacred.

 

Whatever the true source of the Exodus story might have been it doesn’t translate into proof of anything. It is just a story that is filled with an enormous amount of embellishments, hyperbole, and exaggerations conveyed in the framework of myth.

[slave2six]

Why is it that Christians have this habit of starting discussions then disappearing? Isn't there a name for that behaviour...?

[Fernweh]

In order to believe the Exodus story one must also believe, or at least suspend disbelief, that sorcerers could turn wood into snakes, hail stones can turn into fire, and that ghosts can kill babies. 

[disillusioned]

 

Let me preface what I about to say by noting that I am in no sense an historian. . . 

Disillusioned,

 

Your entire response, including the video, was:

 

Ad hominem

Ad novitatem

Ad auctoritate

 

Nowhere did you, or the man in the video, offer any consideration of any primary source data-- save a scant mention of trade routes between Egypt and the levant.

 

Why is focusing on primary sources of information so important?

 

Here is why:

 

Suppose I asked you, "Disillusioned, what is the basic standard methodology for dating when ancient documents were originally written?"

 

If you don't know the answer to that question, then how will you know if any given source is being biased with regard to this text or that text?

 

Popular vote?

 

Suppose I asked you, "Disillusioned, what is the basic standard methodology before one may admit an archaeological finding as a fact?"

 

If you don't know the answer to that question, then how will you know someone is basing their analysis on credible findings or not?

 

Ad hominem attacks?

 

Do you see the point?  Sticking to basic criterion, methodology, and primary source data becomes especially important when dealing with issues where strong opinions are known to exist.

 

 

SteveBennett,

 

I committed none of the fallacies that you listed. That you claim I did makes me call into question whether or not you really understand what each of them is.

 

You made a claim that the Exodus has occurred. I did not reject this claim. Since I did not reject your claim, I cannot be said to have rejected it in an ad hominem fashion. 

 

I did note what some other, knowledgeable individuals seem to think. I did not say that I agreed with these people. Nor did I say that their view is correct because they are knowledgeable. In no way, then, can I be said to have been arguing from authority.

 

Actually, all that I really claimed was to have knowledge of a prevailing view. I did not claim that this view is correct. More importantly, I did not claim that this view is correct because it is prevalent. Therefore, I cannot be said to have appealed to novelty.

 

You are correct in one thing: I did not offer any primary source data. I also didn't claim to. I am perfectly aware that a youtube video is not a primary source. It is, at best, a secondary source. But here's the real issue, and I can't stress this enough: I'm not the one who is attempting to use a youtube video as a primary source. I posted that video as a point of general interest. I did not claim that it demonstrates anything, save that archaeologists seem to think that the Exodus story is a legend. You, on the other hand, posted a youtube video and then claimed that your video proves that the crossing of the Exodus site has been found. You then went on to lecture us all about proper scientific methodology. See the irony?

 

(Edited to fix a typo)

[midniterider]

 

When it comes to historical or empirical questions of fact, I always recommend one employs the scientific method of investigation:

 

1) Question

2) Research

3) Hypothesis

4) Experiment

5) Revise

6) Conclude

 

Let's try this scientific method with the actual existence of Jesus right this very moment.

 

1. Question: Does Jesus exist right now like Christians say he does?

2. Research: The bible and other pro-Christian books say he does. Other anti-Christian books say he doesn't exist. Inconclusive results. Reads surveys indicating 2 billion people believe in Christ while 5 billion don't. Inconclusive results. Compare studies of the effect of prayer on patients in hospitals. Inconclusive results.

3. Hypothesis: Jesus could be a myth.

4. Experiment: Flip a coin 1000 times, each time praying to the currently living Jesus that the coin lands on 'heads'. Expect at a least 85% 'heads' rate from the Savior (cutting him some slack by 15%) . Result: only about 50% heads rate. Same as random chance. Experiment: Pray for world peace. Result: War. Experiment: Pray for visitation from Jesus. Result: No visitation. Experiment: Pray for things to happen for 10 years. Result: Rate of success no more than that of random chance.

5. Rinse and repeat 1-4.

6. Conclude: No effort made on the part of Jesus to demonstrate his own existence therefore concluding that Jesus does not exist.

 

--

 

Christians will ignore this conclusion and 'fall back' to discussions of geological surveys, scripture, and made up miracle stories on social media.

[Deva]

Why is it that Christians have this habit of starting discussions then disappearing? Isn't there a name for that behaviour...?

A post and run troll. We have seen many. Usually Christians.

 

I just happened to have been on when he started posting this morning. Aren't I the lucky one?

[Ravenstar]

Okay.. I'm ready. First of all a carved or created Scarab is an AMULET:

 

An amulet (Latin amuletum) can be any object but its most important characteristic is its alleged power to protect its owner from danger or harm.^[1] Amulets are different from talismans as a talisman is believed to bring luck or some other benefit, though it can offer protection as well.^[2] Amulets are often confused with pendants—charms that hang from necklaces—any given pendant may indeed be an amulet, but so may any other charm which purports to protect its owner from danger.

Potential amulets include gems, especially engraved gems, statues, coins, drawings, pendants, rings, plants and animals; even words in the form of a magical spell or incantation to repel evil or bad luck.

The word "amulet" comes from the Latin amuletum; the earliest extant use of the term is in Pliny's Natural History, meaning "an object that protects a person from trouble".^[1][3]

~http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amulet

 

Basically an amulet is a GRAVEN IMAGE WITH MAGICAL POWERS TO PROTECT THE WEARER FROM HARM. That Jacob would have worn one would have been blasphemous as it is invoking the Egyptian SUN GOD Ra's protection.

 

Let's also dispel the made up nonsense that the Scarab amulet is akin to a 'police badge'. This is incredibly ridiculous. The scarab is a symbol of the movement of the sun… when the Egyptians saw the dung beetle (which is what a scarab beetle is) pushing it's little ball of shit around they saw it as the same as the sun being 'pushed' through the sky. Scarab beetle became sacred to the sun god Re, or Ra, or Atum-re.. depending on what period you were speaking of. EVERYONE had scarabs, from Pharaohs to the lowliest peasant.. it's just the material they were carved, made from was different. They served primarily as good luck amulets… 

 

In ancient Egyptian religion, the Sun god Ra is seen to roll across the sky each day, transforming bodies and souls. Beetles of the Scarabaeidae family (dung beetle) roll dung into a ball as food and as a brood chamber in which to lay eggs that are later transformed into larva. For these reasons the scarab was seen as a symbol of this heavenly cycle and of the idea or rebirth or regeneration. The Egyptian god Khepri, Ra as the rising sun, was often depicted as a scarab beetle or as a scarab beetle-headed man. The ancient Egyptians believed that Khepri renewed the sun every day before rolling it above the horizon, then carried it through the other world after sunset, only to renew it, again, the next day. A golden scarab, of the monotheistic Nefertiti was discovered in the Uluburun wreck. ^[1]

 

Scarabs were popular amulets in ancient Egypt. They survive in large numbers and, through their inscriptions and typology, they are an important source of information for archeologists and historians of the Ancient world. They also represent a significant body of ancient art.

For reasons that are not clear (although no doubt connected to the religious significance of the Egyptian god Khepri), amulets in the form of scarab beetles had became enormously popular in Ancient Egypt by the early Middle Kingdom (approx 2000BCE) and remained popular for the rest of the pharaonic period and beyond. During that long period the function of scarabs repeatedly changed. Primarily amulets, they were also inscribed for use as personal or administrative seals or were incorporated into jewellery. Some scarabs were apparently created for political or diplomatic purposes to commemorate or advertise royal achievements. By the early New Kingdom heart scarabs had become part of the battery of amulets protecting mummies.

From the middle Bronze Age, other ancient peoples of the Mediterranean and the Middle East imported scarabs from Egypt and also produced scarabs in Egyptian or local styles, especially in the Levant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scarab_(artifact) (with citations)

Some WERE used as commemorative, or as tokens for officials, but that would need an inscription and signature from whomever was bestowing this honour. Mostly they were VERY commonplace. Not really a big deal in the Egyptian world and copied throughout the ancient world.

 

to be continued….

[RipVanWinkle]

SteveBennett: Your reasoning is very much like the following joke I heard years ago: "Your wife is a liar and a whore."

 

Husband: "She is not a liar."      

 

In other words, even if your position regarding the crossing point were correct, you can't win the argument about the inaccuracy of the bible by showing that one claimed falsehood is in fact true without also proving that the remaining 10,000 falsehoods are in fact true.  bill

[Ravenstar]

There seems to be a nasty trend for the apologists to relate the 'apiru, or hirubu with the Hyksos to make the biblical account reconcile with the historical record.

 

The Hyksos, in Egypt (whose borders shifted from the Nile delta to Syria and back and forth over the millennia in a push and pull relationship with Persia, Akkadia and Mesopotamia/Babylonia) - which includes Palestine) "Hyksos"  means basically 'foreign invader'.. they actually ruled Egypt for a while as Pharaohs…they were finally ejected… not as prior slaves but as a conquering people's…. where hibiru is closer to 'brigands'… or akin to the derogatory 'gypsy' or Roma of Europe. It was a term to denote the wanderers - nomads, it was not a pleasant term.

 

"Therefore the best explanation for all of the archaeological evidence seems to be that Israel is a confederation of Hapiru tribes in the hill country of Canaan, that formed the nation of Israel in the Iron Age. Originally, Abraham was part of an Amorite migration south into Canaan from Mesopotamia which continued down to Egypt climaxing in the Hyksos rule. The exodus is to be identified with the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt by Ahmose (1570-50 BC; Frerichs and Lesko, 1997, 82, 96). Then they wandered in the wilderness being included among the Shasu, and caused the fall of MBIIIC cities in Canaan (the conquest). The Conquest was not total but just in the highlands for Egypt controlled the lower lands and coast. They were called Hapiru (from which the name Hebrew may originate) in the Amarna period (time of the judges) until their league was consolidated into 12 tribes which became the nation of Israel in the Iron Age."

 

~http://www.bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodus.htm

 

 

Hyksos, Encyclopedia Britannica

 

The group of mixed Semitic-Asiatics who settled in northern Egypt during the 18th century BC. In about 1630 they seized power, and Hyksos kings ruled Egypt as the 15th dynasty (c. 1630–1521 BC). The name Hyksos was used by the Egyptian historian Manetho (fl. 300 BC), who, according to the Jewish historian Josephus (fl. 1st century AD), translated the word as “king-shepherds” or “captive shepherds.” Josephus wished to demonstrate the great antiquity of the Jews and thus identified the Hyksos with the Hebrews of the Old Testament. This view is not now supported by most scholars, though it is possible that Hebrews came into Egypt during the Hyksos period or that some Hyksos were the ancestors of some Hebrews. “Hyksos” was probably an Egyptian term for “rulers of foreign lands” (heqa-khase), and it almost certainly designated the foreign dynasts rather than a whole nation. Although traditionally they also formed the 16th dynasty, those rulers were probably only vassals of the 15th-dynasty kings. They seem to have been connected with the general migratory movements elsewhere in the Middle East at the time. Although most of the Hyksos names seem to have been Semitic, there may also have been a Hurrian element among them.

 

The Hyksos introduced the horse and chariot, the compound bow, improved battle axes, and advanced fortification techniques into Egypt {a thing that Hebrew shepards would not have done—jk}. At Avaris (modern Tall ad-Dab'a) in the northeastern delta, they built their capital with a fortified camp over the remains of a Middle Kingdom town that they had seized. Excavations since the 1960s have revealed a Canaanite-style temple, Palestinian-type burials, including horse burials, Palestinian types of pottery, and quantities of their superior weapons.

 

Their chief deity was the Egyptian storm and desert god, Seth, whom they identified with an Asiatic storm god. From Avaris they ruled most of Lower Egypt and Upper Egypt up to Hermopolis directly. South to Cusae, and briefly even beyond, they ruled through Egyptian vassals. When under Seqenenre and Kamose the Thebans began to rebel, the Hyksos pharaoh Auserre Apopi I tried unsuccessfully to make an alliance with the rulers of Cush who had overrun Egyptian Nubia in the later years of the 13th dynasty (c. 1650 BC).

 

The Theban revolt spread northward under Kamose, and in about 1521 Avaris fell to his successor, Ahmose, founder of the 18th dynasty, thereby ending 108 years of Hyksos rule over Egypt. Although vilified by the Egyptians starting with Hatshepsut, the Hyksos had ruled as pharaohs and were listed as legitimate kings in the Turin Papyrus. At least superficially they were Egyptianized, and they did not interfere with Egyptian culture beyond the political sphere.

 

_______________________________________________________________

According to THIS paper there is no mention of the Hebrews at all in Avaris during this time period. That there may have been trade with them is possible, but they don't seem to have had any real influence. (see below)

 

http://www.academia.edu/3575410/Hyksos_Rule_during_the_Second_Intermediate_Period

 

It seems you haven't actually LOOKED at all the evidence for what you cite as 'proofs' because there is much controversy about what happened in this period of Egyptian and Palestinian/Canaanite history. The Hebrews and the Hyksos can not be the same people because the Hyksos worshipped SETH, not Yahweh (Yahweh was still a Canaanite 'son of El' at this period.

 

In the spring of 1928 a Syrian farmer was plowing his field when he uncovered a stone over a grave. Archaeologists were called in which led to the discovery of the near by ancient city of Ugarit, modern day Ras Shamra (Curtis 1985, 18; Craigie 1983, 7). Many clay tablets were uncovered which were written in cuneiform in a language now called "Ugaritic." See also Ugarit and the Bible. Since Ugaritic is very similar to Hebrew it can help illuminate Hebrew words. One of the most interesting personal names is ysril which equals "Israel" in Hebrew (Gordon 1965, Text 2069:3; Glossary #1164). It is the name of a charioteer (mrynm; Zobel 1990, Vol.6, 399). While this is not referring to Israel as a nation, it does show the use of this personal name in the Late Bronze Age. The name "Israel" may have originally meant "El rules" in Ugaritic (Zobel 1990, 401).

 

Another interesting name is yw (CTA 1 IV:14; Herdner 1963, 4) which may be identified with "Yahweh" in Hebrew according to Dussaud (Cooper 1981, 367). Herdner states that the reading yw is certain (1963, 4 note 3). Murtonen also argues for this reading (1951, 6-8). Gordon says, "Yahwe with -h- corresponds to Yw exactly like yhlm to Ug. ylm" (1965, Glossary #1084). The name yw appears in the Baal and Yam text which is part of the cycle of Baal myths. The supreme god El instructs Kothar-and-Khasis (the craftsman god) to build a palace for Yam (Sea) who is also called judge Nahar (river). As El sits in his banqueting hall he declares to the other deities that Yam's personal name was yw, but his new name is to be "darling of El" (Deut. 33:12). In order to secure his power Yam must drive his rival Baal from his throne. El then holds a feast to celebrate this naming ceremony (Gibson 1977, 3-4). The actual text in line 14 (CTA 1 iv:14; Herdner 1963, 4; Gibson 1977, 39) says, sm. bny. yw which I translate as "the name of my son is Yahweh." This would make Yahweh a rival of Baal which is reminiscent of the conflict of Elijah with the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel (I Kings 18).

 

http://jeromekahn123.tripod.com/enlightenment/id17.html

 

 

from Ha'aretz Magazine, Friday, October 29, 1999

 

Following 70 years of intensive excavations in the Land of Israel, archaeologists have found out: The patriarchs' acts are legendary stories, we did not sojourn in Egypt or make an exodus, we did not conquer the land. Neither is there any mention of the empire of David and Solomon. Those who take an interest have known these facts for years, but Israel is a stubborn people and doesn't want to hear about it

 

This is what archaeologists have learned from their excavations in the Land of Israel: the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is that the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom. And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the God of Israel, YHWH, had a female consort and that the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai. 

Most of those who are engaged in scientific work in the interlocking spheres of the Bible, archaeology and the history of the Jewish people—and who once went into the field looking for proof to corroborate the Bible story—now agree that the historic events relating to the stages of the Jewish people's emergence are radically different from what that story tells. 

 

 

• The Exodus from Egypt, the wanderings in the desert and Mount Sinai: The many Egyptian documents that we have make no mention of the Israelites' presence in Egypt and are also silent about the events of the Exodus. Many documents do mention the custom of nomadic shepherds to enter Egypt during periods of drought and hunger and to camp at the edges of the Nile Delta. However, this was not a solitary phenomenon: such events occurred frequently over thousands of years and were hardly exceptional. Generations of researchers tried to locate Mount Sinai and the encampments of the tribes in the desert. Despite these intensive efforts, not even one site has been found that can match the biblical account. 

 

The power of tradition has now led some researchers to 'discover' Mount Sinai in the northern Hijaz or, as already mentioned, at Mount Karkoum in the Negev. The central events in the history of the Israelites are not corroborated in documents external to the Bible or in archaeological findings. Most historians today agree that at best, the stay in Egypt and the exodus events occurred among a few families and that their private story was expanded and 'nationalized' to fit the needs of theological ideology. 

 

• Origin of the Israelites: The conclusions drawn from episodes in the emergence of the people of Israel in stages, taken together, gave rise to a discussion of the bedrock question: the identity of the Israelites. If there is no evidence for the exodus from Egypt and the desert journey, and if the story of the military conquest of fortified cities has been refuted by archaeology, who, then, were these Israelites? The archaeological findings did corroborate one important fact: in the early Iron Age (beginning some time after 1200 BCE), the stage that is identified with the 'settlement period', hundreds of small settlements were established in the area of the central hill region of the Land of Israel, inhabited by farmers who worked the land or raised sheep. If they did not come from Egypt, what is the origin of these settlers? Israel Finkelstein, professor of archaeology at Tel Aviv University, has proposed that these settlers were the pastoral shepherds who wandered in this hill area throughout the Late Bronze Age (graves of these people have been found, without settlements). According to his reconstruction, in the Late Bronze Age (which preceded the Iron Age) the shepherds maintained a barter economy of meat in exchange for grains with the inhabitants of the valleys. With the disintegration of the urban and agricultural system in the lowlands, the nomads were forced to produce their own grains, and hence the incentive for stable settlements. 

 

The name 'Israel' is mentioned in a single Egyptian document from the period of Merneptah, king of Egypt, dating from 1208 BCE: 'Plundered is Canaan with every evil, Ascalon is taken, Gezer is seized, Yenoam has become as though it never was, Israel is desolated, its seed is not.' Merneptah refers to the country by its Canaanite name and mentions several cities of the kingdom, along with a non-urban ethnic group. According to this evidence, the term 'Israel' was given to one of the population groups that resided in Canaan toward the end of the Late Bronze Age, apparently in the central hill region, in the area where the Kingdom of Israel would later be established. 

 

A Kingdom With No Name 

• The united monarchy: Archaeology was also the source that brought about a shift regarding the reconstruction of the reality in the period known as the 'united monarchy' of David and Solomon. The Bible describes this period as the zenith of the political, military and economic power of the people of Israel in ancient times. In the wake of David's conquests, the empire of David and Solomon stretched from the Euphrates River to Gaza ('For he controlled the whole region west of the Euphrates, from Tiphsah to Gaza, all the kings west of the Euphrates,' 1 Kings 5:4). The archaeological findings at many sites show that the construction projects attributed to this period were meager in scope and power. 

 

The three cities of Hazor, Megiddo and Gezer, which are mentioned among Solomon's construction enterprises, have been excavated extensively at the appropriate layers. Only about half of Hazor's upper city was fortified, covering an area of only 30 dunams (7.5 acres), out of a total area of 700 dunams which was settled in the Bronze Age. At Gezer there was apparently only a citadel surrounded by a casemate wall covering a small area, while Megiddo was not fortified with a wall. The picture becomes even more complicated in the light of the excavations conducted in Jerusalem, the capital of the united monarchy. Large sections of the city have been excavated over the past 150 years. The digs have turned up impressive remnants of the cities from the Middle Bronze Age and from Iron Age II ( the period of the Kingdom of Judea). No remains of buildings have been found from the period of the united monarchy (even according to the agreed chronology), only a few pottery shards. Given the preservation of the remains from earlier and later periods, it is clear that Jerusalem in the time of David and Solomon was a small city, perhaps with a small citadel for the king, but in any event it was not the capital of an empire as described in the Bible. This small chiefdom is the source of the title 'Beth David' mentioned in later Aramean and Moabite inscriptions. The authors of the biblical account knew Jerusalem in the 8th century BCE, with its wall and the rich culture of which remains have been found in various parts of the city, and projected this picture back to the age of the united monarchy. Presumably, Jerusalem acquired its central status after the destruction of Samaria, its northern rival, in 722 BCE. 

 

YHWH and his Consort 

How many gods, exactly, did Israel have? Together with the historical and political aspects, there are also doubts as to the credibility of the information about belief and worship. The question about the date at which monotheism was adopted by the kingdoms of Israel and Judea arose with the discovery of inscriptions in ancient Hebrew that mention a pair of gods: YHWH and his Asherath. At two sites, Kuntilet Ajrud in the southwestern part of the Negev hill region, and Khirbet el-Kom in the Judea piedmont, Hebrew inscriptions have been found that mention 'YHWH and his Asherah', 'YHWH Shomron and his Asherah', 'YHWH Teman and his Asherah'. The authors were familiar with a pair of gods, YHWH and his consort Asherah, and send blessings in the couple's name. These inscriptions, from the 8th century BCE, raise the possibility that monotheism, as a state religion, is actually an innovation of the period of the Kingdom of Judea, following the destruction of the Kingdom of Israel. 

 

 

The Evidence for Slavery in Egypt 

The major document which has come to light concerning the Canaanite population of Egypt during the 13th Dynasty is the Brooklyn Papyrus 35.1446 [Hayes 1955], but there are also several papyri from the pyramid town of Senuseret II at Kahun, known collectively as the Illahun Papyri [Griffith 1898]. In the case of the former, out of a total holding in one Theban estate amounting to 79 domestic slaves, no less than 45 bore Canaanite names [Kemp 1983, p. 155]. The fact that the household was located in Upper Egypt suggest that an even higher proportion might be expected for the eastern delta where Egypt adjoins Canaan. Thus it should be quite reasonable to infer that between 50% and 75% of the slave/servant population during the 13th Dynasty was of Asiatic/Canaanite origin. 

Posener has noted that all the early references to Aamu (i.e. Canaanites) living in Egypt date to the period from Amenemhat III down to the mid-13th Dynasty, around the time of Neferhotep I (Turin Canon VI, 25) [Posener 1957, pp. 145-63]. The evidence further suggests that they were more numerous in the 13th Dynasty, in spite of the poverty of archaeological data for this period, compared to the relatively rich preceding dynasty [Van Seters 1966, p. 90]. In general, they seem to have assimilated well into the existing culture of Egypt. The surviving Aamu population records of the 13th Dynasty also show a greater number of female slaves to male [Hayes 1955, p. 99]. 

 

~ Asiatics entering Egypt from the tomb of Khnumhotep, Beni Hassan. Hmmm… slaves carrying bows and arrows? - how likely is that?

A number of texts have come to light which indicate that certain of these Aamu managed to reach high positions in the administration during the latter part of the 12th Dynasty (some also marrying Egyptian women), but that this state of affairs did not last into the late 13th Dynasty: 

‘The fact that important persons in the time of Amenemhet III felt free to designate themselves as Aam or as born of an Aamt means that one can hardly consider them as slaves in the ordinary sense as in the Brooklyn Papyrus. One must therefore reckon with a deterioration in the status of Asiatics between the time of Amenemhet III and that of Neferhotep.' [Van Seters 1966, p. 91] 

Van Seters also interestingly compares the Aamu of the Middle Kingdom with the Habiru, referred-to throughout the Levant from the Middle Kingdom to the el-Amarna Period [Van Seters 1966, p. 91].

 

to be continued...

[Ravenstar]

Next up…  Moses!!!!! ... or, actually, the myth of Sargon of Akkad.     (Which is very far from the Hyksos period, hmmmm)

 

(though) The exact dates of Sargon's birth, death or even reign are unknown. According to the short chronology, he reigned from 2270 to 2215 BC (the Middle Chronology lists his reign as 2334 to 2279 BC). These dates are based on the Sumerian king list.[5]

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sargon_of_Akkad

 

Stay tuned!

[Ravenstar]

Oops, missed this:

 

 

"In the 12th chapter of Joshua is given a list of 31 kingdoms which were conquered by Israel. This was in the fifteenth century B.C. From this time forward they are represented as a mighty nation by Bible historians.

 

Rameses III overran Canaan and conquered it between 1280 and 1260 B.C. The Egyptian records give a list of all the tribes inhabiting it. The children of Israel-- the Hebrews-- were not there. In the 5th century B.C., when Herodotus, the father of History, was collecting materials for his immortal work, he traversed nearly every portion of Western Asia. He describes all its principal peoples and places; but the Jews and Jerusalem are of too little consequence to merit a line from his pen. Not until 332 B.C. do the Jews appear upon the stage of history, and then only as the submissive vassals of a Grecian king."

 

~ John E. Remsburg, The Bible (1901), pg. 263.

 

Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists for years and even decades.

 

The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and Joseph among others -- were the first to go when biblical scholars found those passages rife with anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of enslavement, courage and liberation in human history, also slipped from history to legend when archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and the absence of evidence of large encampments in the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses brought the Israelites after leading them through the parted Red Sea).

 

Finkelstein is an iconoclast. He established his reputation in part by developing a theory about the settlement patterns of the nomadic shepherd tribes who would eventually become the Israelites, bolstering the growing consensus that they were originally indistinguishable from the rest of their neighbors, the Canaanites. This overturns a key element in the Bible: The Old Testament depicts the Israelites as superior outsiders -- descended from Abraham, a Mesopotamian immigrant -- entitled by divine order to invade Canaan and exterminate its unworthy, idolatrous inhabitants.

 

The famous battle of Jericho, with which the Israelites supposedly launched this campaign of conquest after wandering for decades in the desert, has been likewise debunked: The city of Jericho didn't exist at that time and had no walls to come tumbling down. These assertions are all pretty much accepted by mainstream archaeologists.

 

"Research is research, and strong societies can easily endure discoveries like this." By comparison with today's skeptical turmoil, the early years of the modern Israeli state were a honeymoon period for archaeology and the Bible, in which the science seemed to validate the historical passages of the Old Testament left and right. As Finkelstein and Silberman relate, midcentury archaeologists usually "took the historical narratives of the Bible at face value"; Israel's first archaeologists were often said to approach a dig with a spade in one hand and the Bible in the other. The Old Testament frequently served as the standard against which all other data were measured: If someone found majestic ruins, they dated them to Solomon's time; signs of a battle were quickly attributed to the conquest of Canaan. Eventually, though, as archaeological methods improved and biblical scholars analyzed the text itself for inconsistencies and anachronisms, the amount of the Bible regarded as historically verifiable eroded. The honeymoon was over.

 

Marcus says that Finkelstein is "difficult to dismiss because he's so much an insider in terms of his credentials and background. He's an archaeologist, not a theologian, and he is an Israeli. It's hard to say that someone who was born in Israel and intends to live the rest of his life there is anti-Israeli."

 

http://salon.com/books/feature/2001/02/07/solomon/index.html

 

 

The consensus among biblical scholars today is that there was never any exodus of the proportions described in the Bible.[15] According to Exodus 12:37–38, the Israelites numbered "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children," plus many non-Israelites and livestock.[16] Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550 men aged 20 and up.[17] The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people,[18] compared with an entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE of around 3 to 3.5 million.[19] Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 150 miles long.[20] No evidence has been found that indicates Egypt ever suffered such a demographic and economic catastrophe or that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds.[21]

 

Some scholars have rationalised these numbers into smaller figures, for example reading the Hebrew as "600 families" rather than 600,000 men, but all such solutions raise more problems than they solve.[22] The view of mainstream modern biblical scholarship is that the improbability of the Exodus story originates because it was written not as history, but to demonstrate God's purpose and deeds with his Chosen People, Israel.[4] Some have suggested that the 603,550 people delivered from Egypt (according to Numbers 1:46) is not a number, but a gematria (a code in which numbers represent letters or words) for bnei yisra'el kol rosh, "the children of Israel, every individual;"[23] while the number 600,000 symbolises the total destruction of the generation of Israel which left Egypt, none of whom lived to see the Promised Land.[24]

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus

[florduh]

...I told you to watch out for Ravenstar...

 

Great job!

[TrueFreedom]

She's pretty bad-ass.

[Ravenstar]

So far, from what I understand is there are several problems with the story of the Exodus. It begins with the identification of WHO was in Egypt, and when.. and then WHY. 

 

I'd like to mention that the story of Joseph is a parable… one of which the story of Jesus is built on. 12 brothers, 12 disciples, a favoured and innocent son, sold… (and for SILVER) the 'forgiving' of his brothers by Joseph, the wronged. It's a morality play… and would have been accepted as such by the people of the time. These were very popular and common ways of teaching. One only needs to know a little bit of Greek mythology to see the similarities here. We can reasonably say that Joseph was NOT a real person. That people from Canaan travelled to Egypt is not in question. Egypt was the breadbasket of the area, and during famine MANY peoples went there to purchase grain. How do you think Egypt became so wealthy?

 

Then there is the lack of identification of the Israelites, or Hebrews as an actual people(as in being an actual 'kingdom')… until much later than the 15th century BCE. Closer to the 8th to 5th century BCE.

 

There are bits and pieces of mythology in this story from many of the larger civilizations of the entire region. Egypt, Canaan, Persia, Akkad, Mesopotamia. But the kicker is the story does not seem to have come together as we know it today until the period AFTER the conquest of Israel and the captivity of Judah.

 

Let's just say they stole a lot of stuff...

 

Like this: The Hymn is attributed to Pharaoh Akenaten;

Hymn to the Aten " Lord of All, Lord of heaven, Lord of Earth
Thy rays embrace the lands
Thou layest the foundations of the earth
How manifold are thy works!
The ships go down and up the stream..."   Psalm 104 "O Lord thou art very Great
Who coverest thyself with light as a garment
Who laid the foundations of the earth
O Lord how manifold are thy works!
How ships sail to and fro..."

 

Though the colourful story of the Hebrew Exodus from Egypt is known to everyone the legend itself is a complete fantasy, a re-write of a story learned in Babylon. In Exodus, Yahweh creates a people, not the cosmos: 

In the fantasy 'history' (chapter 1 of the Book of Numbers) 603,550 'males of military age' fled Egypt at the time of the Exodus, which implies a refugee army of at least two million – more than the total population of Egypt itself! And this multitude supposedly wandered the wilderness for forty years, contriving to leave not a trace of their passing for posterity.

 

"Instead of splitting the carcass of a sea-monster to create the world, as Marduk did, Yahweh divided the Sea of Reeds to let his people escape from Pharaoh and the pursuing army. Instead of slaying the demonic hordes, like Marduk, Yahweh drowned the Egyptians."

– K. Armstrong, A History of Jerusalem, p31.

 

Records one historian:
 

"Despite the mass of contemporary records that have been unearthed in Egypt, not one historical reference to the presence of the Israelites has yet been found there. Not a single mention of Joseph, the Pharaoh's 'Grand Vizier'. Not a word about Moses, or the spectacular flight from Egypt and the destruction of the pursuing Egyptian army."
 

– Magnus Magnusson, The Archaeology of the Bible Lands - BC, p43.

[Ravenstar]

This little story has so many holes I don't even know where to go from here.  

 

Unfortunately the entire legitimacy for Israel kinda depends on this particular bit of legend.

[TrueFreedom]

Droooooooooooool........   -----------------

[sdelsolray]

Did you know that the crossing site of the Exodus has been found?

…

 

 

No.  I do not "know" this.  Please provide references to the peer reviewed research supporting this mere assertion.

 

…

See comment's section of the video to review "holes" people have already attempted to poke.

…

 

A poor and disingenuous reference.  Have you actually watched that video?

 

Peer reviewed research, please.

 

Try again.

 

…

Feel free to put your thinking cap on, and poke holes as well.

 

No thanks.