|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 60 (9209 total) |
| |
Skylink | |
Total: 919,451 Year: 6,708/9,624 Month: 48/238 Week: 48/22 Day: 3/12 Hour: 0/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Bible Unearthed - Exodus | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Orion Inactive Member |
Re: The Bible Unearthed, Finkelstein & Silberman, Free Press Pub.
These two authors, one an archeologist and the other a historian, have published a book which draws attention to some striking discrepancies between certain Bible (Torah) narratives vs. recent archeological and historical findings. By recent, I mean within the last hundred years. Of the several topics covered within the book (the Patriarchs, Exodus, conquest of Canaan, etc.), I'd like to discuss the Exodus story within this thread. Israel Finkelstein - Director of the Institute of Archeology at Tel Aviv University. Neil Asher Silberman - Director of historical interpretation for the Ename Center for Public Archeology in Belgium and a contributing editor to Archeology magazine. The book of Exodus describes the labours of Hebrew slaves in Egypt, their eventual liberation at the hand of Moses, and the subsequent wanderings of these people in Sinai for forty years. Does this story reflect historical reality? Can we find extra-biblical and/or archeological evidence in support of this story? First, let's establish the time frame. The biblical account in 1 Kings 6:1 dates the Exodus to about 1440 BCE in the Late Bronze age (LB). Right away, problems crop up. Exodus 1:11 tells us that the Hebrews were forced to construct the city of Raamses, but the first pharaoh with that name came to the throne in 1320 BCE, more than a century after the biblical date of the Exodus. Also, despite the fact that the ancient Egyptians kept good records, there exists no Egyptian record of a concentration of Hebrews living in the eastern delta, as implied by Genesis 47:27. Indeed, there are no Egyptian records relating to a Hebrew presence in Egypt at all. Furthermore, during this time period (LB), Egypt was in control not only of the Sinai, but of Canaan, as well. Egypt had fortifications throughout the entire region, extending as far north as the border with Syria, making it unlikely that a large group of Hebrews could have entered the region without meeting Egyptian opposition. According to the Exodus account (12:37-38), the freed Hebrews numbered almost two million (600 thousand men as well as women, children, and the elderly, not to mention cattle, sheep, etc.), and wandered in the Sinai for forty years. However, archeologists have been unable to uncover a single campsite or sign of occupation within the Sinai during this (LB) period - no pot sherds, no bones, no emcampements, nothing. The Bible (Deut. 1:46, 2:14) tells us that these Hebrews spent a considerable amount of time (perhaps 38 out of 40 years) encamped in and around Kadesh-barnea in the Sinai. The location of this site is set in Num. 34. Repeated excavations within this area have not provided the slightest evidence of occupation during the LB. Ezion-geber is another such site identified in the Bible, and again, no trace of LB occupation has been discovered. What does this tell us? It suggests that the dates and places mentioned in the Exodus story do not relate to the time of the Exodus as related in the Bible. Quoting from the authors... The most evocative and consistent geographical details of the Exodus story come from the seventh century BCE, during the great era of the prosperity of the kingdom of Judah - six centuries after the events of the Exodus were supposed to have taken place. All of the major places that play a role in the story of the wandering of the Israelites were inhabited in the seventh century; in some cases they were occupied only at that time. The Bible tells us that Moses sent agents from Kadesh-barnea to the king of Edom to ask permission to pass through the country on the way to Canaan (Num 20:14-21). The king refused. Archeological investigations suggest that Edom reached statehood only under Assyrian rule sometime in the seventh century BCE. Before that, it was a backwater. Again, this seventh century era keeps popping up in archeological and historical investigations. But by this time, Judah was already established as an Israelite settlement.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
quote: Hi Orion. I see we're both nubies here in town. Imo, you and these authors need to check out the book and videos on the recent stuff found in the Gulf of Aqaba and the 19th Dynasty papri found attesting to the havoc this disaster brought upon Egypt. I will soon be ordering the book, and maybe the video, I assume, and to be able to better refute some of your points after reading it. So far I've seen portions of the chariot wheels video and data on TV as stated in my thread on this subject. I assume you have read that thread? For now gotta hit hay. Hope to get back to you soon. ------------------Surely the Lord Jehovah will do nothing except he reveal the secret to his servants the prophets. Amos 3:7
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Orion Inactive Member |
So far I've seen portions of the chariot wheels video and data on TV as stated in my thread on this subject.
You don't mean Ron Wyatt, do you?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 5212 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
Yes, he means Ron Wyatt!
Imagine mentioning Ron Wyatt in the same post as Israel Finkelstien LOL, it's absolutely mind boggling. The Bible Unearthed is a bit less technical than Finkelstein's usual writings, but I believe it is deliberately written for the layperson as most people do not know that archaeology has thoroughly debunked the enslavement in Egypt, the Exodus and the military conquest of Canaan. Even William Dever no longer adhere's to the Bible account of these events, in fact, you wont find a reputable archaeologist in the UK, USA or Europe that promotes the Bible's version of these events. As for Ron Wyatt, he was just a nurse, no archaeological training. Some of the more sad things about Ron is that he took Henry Morris to the site where he said he had found Noah's Ark, and even Henry Morris was shocked at how pathetic it was, he claimed that it is simply a rock formation, one of many such formations around that area. Also, this nonsense about the Gulf of Aqabah simply doesn't make sense, this area is too far away from Egypt to be the site of the 'sea crossing', the Egyptians would have caught up with the Israelites before they could reach there. Finally, just a note on the Exodus group. It is said by the vast majority of biblical scholars (Albright, Wright, Glueck) that there would be 2-3 million in the Exodus group, now marching in rows of 4 this column would stretch for over 350 miles!! It would stretch all the way across the Sinai desert and back again, also it would take the people in the last row over a month to reach where the first row set out from! It is obvious that the Exodus account needs to be reinterpreted in some way, if there are kernels of historical facts in it then they need to be sifted out from the propaganda, ideologies and myths. Best Wishes.Brian. PS, I am not sure but I think I read once on the net that Wyatt had failed a lie detector test once regarding his finds, I think that a potential sponsor asked him to take it before he would fund another 'dig' for Wyatt, I'll look into it and let you know. ------------------Remembering events that never happened is a dangerous thing!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
blitz77 Inactive Member |
[whoops replied to wrong person, I meant the original poster]
As I recall David M. Rohl in his book "A Test of Time" addresses these and many more issues, with his new chronology. In his book he addresses the long standing 300 year discrepancy between the archaelogy and the Bible. You could go try read the book sometime, its quite interesting. Anyway, if you want the basics of what its about, David Rohl's "New Chronology" is a good place to start, along with Debate Topics: Historical [This message has been edited by blitz77, 03-16-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Orion Inactive Member |
Imagine mentioning Ron Wyatt in the same post as Israel Finkelstien LOL, it's absolutely mind boggling.
Yup. See here Also, for a review of the book, See here
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 5212 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
HI Orion,
I am very familiar with Finkelsteins work, I am presently writing a M.th thesis directly related to the 'Origins of the Israelites' debate. I have also studied with Prof. Keith Whitelam when he was at Stirling, Keith is also a world famous scholar in this area of study. A very large proportion of my thesis is obviously related to archaeology and when I was first sent the Wyatt website address in an email I honestly thought it was a joke. I wrote to the webmaster there and he knew less about real archaeology than Ron did. It is these types of sites that really annoy me, academically sub standard, sensationalising unrelated materials, blatantly ignoring contrary evidence, and deliberately misleading the public. It is the same with David Rohl, his work is not of a serious critical standard, yet people see his wild claims and accept it without criticism, Rohl extends the Bible chronology to fit his own interpretation of events, yet he extends the period of the judges by over 600 years. He doen't even address this issue, but I bet he is making a great deal of money from gullible bible inerrantists. Oh well, if only everyone could be bothered to go and study the evidence for themselves then these sites and books would soon dry up. Nice to meet you Orion. Brian. ------------------Remembering events that never happened is a dangerous thing!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 5212 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
Buzsaw, keep your money or put it in a charity box, it would be more productive than wasting it on this nonsense. I e-mailed the webstie you posted and they confirmed that it is Wyatt's material that they are peddling.
Here's a reference that exposes Wyatt for the fraud that he was, the author is livid because Wyatt misquoted and misrepresented him several times. Letter from John Baumgardner regarding Noah's Ark on Mount Ararat Also, here is a good summary of Wyatt's character: A Great Christian Scam Here is an extract:
quote: Think critically before you accept this type of 'evidence', if Ron had found these chariot wheels and other artefacts all those years ago, why are they still lying at the bottom of the sea, surely they would have been on display in a museum by now. Also, why has such a wonderful discovery only to be found on some very low quality Internet websites and NEVER in ANY reputable Archaeological or Theological journal? Answer, because this is a con. Best Wishes Brian. ------------------Remembering events that never happened is a dangerous thing!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
judge Member (Idle past 6696 days) Posts: 216 From: australia Joined: |
Hi Orion!...there is a lot we could discuss here, but I might just touch on acouple of points to start.
Orion:First, let's establish the time frame. The biblical account in 1 Kings 6:1 dates the Exodus to about 1440 BCE in the Late Bronze age (LB). Judge: I think there is very good reason to doubt the 480 years mentioned here as being correct. If you have a look at Acts chapter 13 you will see that 480 years cannot be correct.IOW I beleive the exodus would have happened around 1590 B.C. Orion:Right away, problems crop up. Exodus 1:11 tells us that the Hebrews were forced to construct the city of Raamses, but the first pharaoh with that name came to the throne in 1320 BCE, more than a century after the biblical date of the Exodus. Judge:Why do you imagine that the city by that name is related to the pharoah of that name? All the best [This message has been edited by judge, 03-17-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Orion Inactive Member |
Hey, guy!
I think there is very good reason to doubt the 480 years mentioned here as being correct. If you have a look at Acts chapter 13 you will see that 480 years cannot be correct.IOW I beleive the exodus would have happened around 1590 B.C. I don't believe it is reasonable to attempt to verify the historicity of the Exodus accounts using anything contained in Acts. One has to assume that the authors of the books of Exodus, Kings, Numbers, etc. wrote in a timeframe much closer to the alleged Exodus events than did the author of Acts. Why do you imagine that the city by that name is related to the pharoah of that name? Is that so very far-fetched? The Egyptian name of the city of Raamses was Piramesse, which translates in its full form to "The Domain of Raamses-mearmon, great in victories" and is associated by historians with Ramesses II (source: Anchor Bible Dictionary). Ram II was, in fact, a great warrior and city builder. However, he ruled from 1279 to 1212 BCE, which puts him completely outside the biblical Exodus timeframe.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
judge Member (Idle past 6696 days) Posts: 216 From: australia Joined: |
I don't believe it is reasonable to attempt to verify the historicity of the Exodus accounts using anything contained in Acts. One has to assume that the authors of the books of Exodus, Kings, Numbers, etc. wrote in a timeframe much closer to the alleged Exodus events than did the author of Acts.
Judge:Are you familiar with arguments as to why this 480 years is not 480 years?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Orion Inactive Member |
Are you familiar with arguments as to why this 480 years is not 480 years?
Are you willing to discuss, to share insights, or are you simply playing games?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 6125 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Hi Judge.
in a reply to Orion, Judge writes:
I think there is very good reason to doubt the 480 years mentioned here as being correct. If you have a look at Acts chapter 13 you will see that 480 years cannot be correct. IOW I beleive the exodus would have happened around 1590 B.C. Out of curiosity, how did you arrive at this date? If correct, the pharaoh would have been the 17th Dynasty king Tao II Sekenere (1591-1573, capital Thebes) under the Hyksos (he's the guy who started the ultimately successful war against them). Tao only controlled Upper Egypt, and was killed in battle. His son, Kamose finished the war, and ushered in the New Kingdom period. Interestingly, Tao II's mummy shows evidence of battle ax, spear, etc wounds. He didn't drown. It seems a little strange that you are claiming he was the one who died in the Exodus account.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
judge Member (Idle past 6696 days) Posts: 216 From: australia Joined: |
Hi quetzal...good to have your input!
Hi Judge.in a reply to Orion, Judge writes: I think there is very good reason to doubt the 480 years mentioned here as being correct. If you have a look at Acts chapter 13 you will see that 480 years cannot be correct. IOW I beleive the exodus would have happened around 1590 B.C. Quetzal:Out of curiosity, how did you arrive at this date? Judge:As I mentioned above if we look at 1 kings and compare it with Acts chapter 13 wee see that both sets of numbers cannot possibly be taken literally. (Intersetingly the LXX has a different number of years again.) So the obvious conclusion is that they are both wrong or one of them is wrong (taken literally). My own investigations (as an amatuer ) have led me to believe that the Aramaic NT is the least corrupt of all biblical texts we have. The greek variants of Acts chapt 13 seem to show that some people tried to alter the text to make it fit. There seems a strong tendency for some to stick with the 480 years from the maasoretic hebrew text as a literal time....I think this approach is wrong. A couple of articles giving this sort of date are here. I am aware that as one is authored by Barry setterfield this will cause some additional skepticism for some ...but I think the case presented stands on it's own.http://www.ldolphin.org/barrychron.html http://www.ldolphin.org/icc-am.html I am unable to open these sites at the moment but I beleive that the issue of who was pharoah is touched on in at least one of the essays If correct, the pharaoh would have been the 17th Dynasty king Tao II Sekenere (1591-1573, capital Thebes) under the Hyksos (he's the guy who started the ultimately successful war against them). Tao only controlled Upper Egypt, and was killed in battle. His son, Kamose finished the war, and ushered in the New Kingdom period. Interestingly, Tao II's mummy shows evidence of battle ax, spear, etc wounds. He didn't drown. It seems a little strange that you are claiming he was the one who died in the Exodus account. Judge:I am not....but I will have to go over why this would not be the case again...it is some time. [This message has been edited by judge, 03-18-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
judge Member (Idle past 6696 days) Posts: 216 From: australia Joined: |
Judge:
Are you familiar with arguments as to why this 480 years is not 480 years? Orion:Are you willing to discuss, to share insights, or are you simply playing games? Judge:Hi orion...check out the links I provided to Quetzal. I'm not playing games...but I don't just want an argument for the sake of it. I was not sure whether perhaps your mind was already made up. All the best. [This message has been edited by judge, 03-18-2003]
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024