Dating the Exodus

No.Do you have multiple name disorder ?

Is that why you have failed to support the LLM discussion?edited to add a link just in case you couldn't find it. Check Message 41This message has been edited by jar, 08-16-2004 02:06 PM

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Hi Brian: Cambridge goes on to attribute the mid - 13th century end of Hazor to Barak.Also, then, if I produce an authority refuting Yadin's handling of Judges text your house of evidence here is leaning very precariously.We all know anyone can find a Ph.D. who will support their scriptural rendering.

Hey WILLOWTREE, have you forgotten about the LMM thread at Message 41 or are you finally agreeing that the claims you made about the Great Pyramid are just crap?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Hi WT, So, which end of occupation level did the Cambridge attribute to Joshua?Brian.PS, catch up with everyone tomorrow sometime, sorry about the delay guys.

Don't worry about it. Take your time.

Hi Hydarnes: Great point ! Dr. Gene Scott: " Professor Gordon has proven the high culture of Greece originated from Egypt's Hebrew Hyksos Shepherd Kings".Professor Gordon aligns his research with a mid 14th century Exodus to an early 15th.But his chronology is not the main focus of the posted evidence.Professor Gordon decimates any doubt as to Israel's presence in Egypt and their c.1800 BC flight when a Pharoah rose up "who knew not Joseph". EDIT: expulsion date 100 years prior to Exodus. c.1800 BC = the date when "70 souls" went down to Egypt.Subtract the Hyksos expulsion date from the stated Biblical duration of time Israel was in Egypt and the Bible chronology is relatively confirmed: 430 years from c.1800 BC = the mid 14th to early 15th century Exodus.With the veracity of the Biblical record confirmed true; that is the presence of Israel in Egypt and the Zarahite/Shepherd King rulership in Egypt (Genesis 48/49 "your servants be shepherds") and their expulsion; we can augment Gordon's loose dating to what the Bible says based on the proven veracity of the aforementioned issues.Thus the "70 souls" went down to Egypt 1880 BC - 430 = c.1450 BC Exodus. Israel occupied the Delta/land of Goshen.Thus the paucity of evidence constantly reminded by secularists is not attributed to Israel not being in Egypt.This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 08-16-2004 08:28 PM

This happens to me semi - frequently too.Cut your text into the address bar before "preview" or "submit reply" button is activated.Or cut and paste it into your email account before submitting.As you probably knew all this anyway - just disregard.

The evidence I posted from Cambridge assigns the end of Hazor to Barak.I assume this means what it says.According to your previous stance, based on Yadin's inexplicable dismissal of the Judges text and its destruction of Hazor by Barak, the end of Hazor via Joshua, at this point, depends on a capricious rendering of scripture.

quote:

---

Originally posted by WILLOWTREE

​

Professor Gordon aligns his research with a mid 14th century Exodus to an early 15th.

---

I didn't think this sounded right, so I just reviewed my copy of C. Gordon's "The Bible and The Ancient Near East". On page 112, Professor Gordon specifically has this to say:

quote:

---

As demonstrated in Chapter IX, pp. 149-152, the Exodus from Egypt occurred C. 1175 B.C.E. under the leadership of Moses. Thus . . . we can work back(wards) to an approximate date of 1295 B.C.E. for Joseph, Levi, and the other ten brothers. Working still further back, we arrive at approximate dates of 1325 for Jacob, 1355 for Isaac, and 1385 for Abraham. This date for Abraham puts him firmly in the Amarna Age . . .

---

quote:

---

WT:

​

With the veracity of the Biblical record confirmed true; that is the presence of Israel in Egypt and the Zarahite/Shepherd King rulership in Egypt (Genesis 48/49 "your servants be shepherds") and their expulsion; we can augment Gordon's loose dating to what the Bible says based on the proven veracity of the aforementioned issue.

---

And yet, this is quite curious based on Professor Gordon's above quoted statement. Specifically, that the Zerahites could be ruling c. 1800 B.C. if Zerah's father (Judah) didn't exist until c. 1295 B.C.In consideration of this huge discrepancy in C. Gordon's reported statements, could you please provide the exact reference and quote which supports your statement that he aligns his research with a mid-14th century to 15th century exodus date?

quote:

---

WT:

​

Dr. Gene Scott: " Professor Gordon has proven the high culture of Greece originated from Egypt's Hebrew Hyksos Shepherd Kings".

---

Based both on the exodus dating quoted above and on my reading of what Professor Gordon has to say, this appears to me to be a distortion of the facts. Nevertheless, if you will provide Prof. Gordon's quotations in which he states this is so, I will gladly reconsider.Until then, it is my understanding (which, again is supported by his exodus dates quoted above) that he nowhere says that the Israelites founded Greece. What he does say is that he believes that both the group that founded Minoan Crete c. 1800 B.C. and the Israelites that departed Egypt c. 1175 both branched off from a widespread Semitic race, components of which had reached the delta of Egypt prior to c. 1800 B.C.This is a far cry from what you are attempting to insinuate. And, in actuality, Prof. Gordon's statements quoted here tend to negate both your 14th century exodus date and your insistence that Zerahites/Danites left Egypt and founded Greece.So, again, in case I have read something incorrectly or the printer has mis-printed my copy of C. Gordon's book, please provide the specific reference and quote where C. Gordon contradicts the above quotation.AmlodhiThis message has been edited by Amlodhi, 08-16-2004 08:41 PM

You are confused.My Gordon quotes are exact.He has emigration from Egypt by Hebrews c.1800 BC.Are you paying attention ?CIRCA 1800 BC.We both know what circa means. I quoted Gordon's Hebrew expulsion "c.1800 BC" thats what he said.This means we can interpret "circa" loosely as it is what circa means.This places the stated Bible chronology accurate.Gordon proves the Bible EXCEPT his chronology.I stated plainly that the main focus of Gordon was his proving of Israel's presence in Egypt AND their origins found in Greece.This means the Bible is proven correct THEN IN THIS CONTEXT I said we have a basis to accept the Bible chronology as true. Only if you assert Gordon's quotes to be inaccurate.I won't do that with your Gordon quotes.You have quote mined my post out of context.The facts are contained in the "Common G/H/C" quotes.I plainly said his chronology is not the main focus.I took his loose "c.1800" date and augmented it via the veracity of the Bible proven true, then this is a basis to accept its chronology ALSO.The only serious descrepancy I see is the arrival date of Hebrews into Greece. But this is not the subject. Gordon is really evidencing 3 exoduses. One in c.1800 BC another prior to the Exodus and the Mosaic Exodus. Differentiating these three is not important right now.The context in this debate is the assertions of opponents that hebrews were probably never in Egypt and that the Hyksos were not hebrews.Gordon proves all this incorrect.My point is: Then their Exodus date is also incorrect; a date which is offered to say the Bible is incorrrect. Gordon proves the Bible correct then I jump in and say ON THAT BASIS THE CHRONOLOGY IS ALSO CORRECT because it can be loosely affirmed by Gordon too. You are asserting contrary to what I posted/from Gordon's book.The title says it outright - the quotes say it also.The whole book is evidence that Greece originated from Hebrews who fled Egypt.How does his exodus dates negate the thesis of his book ?You are deliberately saying just the opposite of what Gordon argues based upon chronology from a different book. This is brazen dishonesty.Your post simply ends by asserting, in other words, that Gordon never wrote the book I quoted from.You are asserting contrary to the evidence just because you do not like the evidence. Dr. Scott uses sources like Gordon and hundreds of others.
Sources you secularists conveniently ignore for obvious reasons.Once again, another debater so alarmed by the truth he must assert fraud/lie.

Willow, please stop accusing every one that disagrees with you of lying. It gets old very quickly. If you believe the quotes to be inaccurate than pick up a copy of this book and prove it. Please also answer with the exact references to YOUR quotes as requested.Disagreement with you and/or Dr. Scott does not = lying
Disagreement with you and/or Dr. Scott does not = proof for your side Not that I am saying this, but it SEEMS that others could apply this quote to you. Everytime someone disagrees with you you start ranting.

---

AdminAsgara
Queen of the Universe

http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com
http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

My opponent made the accusation first.I repeated his accusation/his "refutation".Isn't sequence important ?You have ignored his accusation of lie.You have confounded the way it went.

BTW:You can only silence me the way II did.