EvC Forum: Brian and Buz: The Exodus Debate

Email This Thread

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Author

Topic: Brian and Buz: The Exodus Debate

Buzsaw

Inactive Member

Buzsaw Posts Only

Message 31 of 52 (349497)
09-15-2006 9:28 PM

Reply to: Message 30 by Brian
09-15-2006 10:26 AM

Re: Israelites In Egypt.

Brian writes:

Now, if it is the tempest stele, I would expect an explanation of why you find this convincing.

Yes, for now it's the Tempest Stele that I wish to address regarding who the Hyksos were.

The Tempest Stele was set up by pharaoh Ahmose I near the beginning of the 18th Egyptian dynasty about 1550 BC. Below are some rather lengthy exerpts from Ralph Ellis, an Egyptologist who was surprised to find the close resemblence of Hyksos history in and out of Egypt being nearly identical to the Biblical account of that of the Israelites. I see the need to quote at length so as to cover what's needed.

Tempest Stele link writes:

The book "Jesus, Last of the Pharaohs" was primarily a comparison between the Hyksos exodus out of Egypt and the Israelite exodus out of Egypt. To me, the parallel texts were far too close to each other to be the result of coincidence; they had to be one and the same event.

So the arrival of the pamphlet from Chris was quite an extraordinary and fortuitous event. My eyes were immediately drawn to a few paragraphs in the translation of the Stele, for they were familiar but why should the long lost scribblings of an ancient Egyptian scribe appear familiar to me? It was temporarily a little baffling. Was this quote something I had read about regarding the Hyksos pharaohs in Egypt? Was it from the many Egyptian text books that littered my office? Then the penny began to drop; I had seen these paragraphs before, not in a book on Egyptology, but in the Bible.

I was somewhat taken aback, for this biblical quotation detailed the events that occurred during the biblical exodus of the Israelites. Here was, quite possibly, the historical evidence for the exodus that had been sought after by so many people for so long. The "Tempest Stele", as it came to be known known, had been translated and poured over by Egyptologists and historians alike for over 30 years, yet nobody seems to have noticed the fact that a large section of the text was identical to sections in the Torah, Bible and Koran. It seemed impossible that these people had not spotted it before, but there again, perhaps they were not in the right frame of mind to accept such a finding even if it were noticed.

Ahmose

The Tempest Stele was erected by the pharaoh Ahmose I at the beginning of the eighteenth dynasty of Egypt, which equates to about 1550 BC. The stele derives its dramatic title from the great storms that it details, which evidently struck Egypt during the reign of Ahmose I. Climatically speaking, southern, or Upper Egypt can be thought of as being in the midst of the Sahara desert, and although the occasional desert thunderstorm will create a flash flood every decade or so, the area is otherwise bone dry. Ahmoses account of a raging nationwide tempest of rain continuing without cessation and being louder than a waterfall at Aswan, can therefore be considered to be highly unusual in this region.

This was certainly a notable occurrence, it was not only worthy of an Egyptian stele being cut to record these events, but was it also worthy of a scroll being written too? Was the Israelite equivalent of the stele the second book of the Torah Exodus?

The biblical plagues have often been dismissed as being far too late, chronologically speaking, to be coincident with a stele being written by Ahmose I. But for various reasons detailed more fully in the book "Jesus, Last of the Pharaohs", I believe that the biblical exodus was much earlier than currently thought. In essence, I agree with the first century historian Josephus when he says that the Israelite exodus was, in fact, the exodus of the Hyksos peoples from Egypt. The Hyksos exodus has been determined as being in the reign of Ahmose I, which would therefore place the biblical exodus at just the right time for the biblical plagues to be coincident with the Tempest Stele.

The biblical plagues have a similar theme to that which has been translated from the Tempest Stele:

Finally, both the entire Hyksos and the entire Israelites population embarked on an exodus towards Palestine, the Egyptian historian Manetho even indicating that the destination of the Hyksos refugees was Jerusalem.

The similarity between these two historical events is perfectly obvious and so it should not be surprising that someone should propose that they are in reality one and the same event. But even if they were the same event, what we are not quite so sure of is whether this exodus was initiated by a simple pitched battle followed by a hasty retreat, or whether there was some kind of treaty signed and a more orderly withdrawal initiated.

The constant biblical dialogue between the Israelites and the Egyptians would tend to infer that there was some form of discussion and possible agreement between the parties and not just outright conflict. According to the Bible, the Israelites wanted to leave Egypt, but the (Theban) pharaoh would not let them go. I think the Bible is nearly correct in this, but that the true situation was not that the (Theban) pharaoh would not let them go, but that the he would not agree to their terms. Thus the Israelites go back to the pharaoh time and time again asking if he will agree; he accedes at last, but only after there were a number of national calamities (plagues), including deaths among the Egyptian people.

So was there a negotiation between the parties and an orderly withdrawal? Was there an agreement that allowed the Israelites/Hyksos to leave Egypt on their terms, with heads held high and their pockets brimming with gold? The Tempest Stele could, just possibly, be a recording just this when it mentions the bounty of gold, silver, copper oil and cloth that was being given to some unknown party. The Theban pharaoh Ahmose I is clearly giving a kings ransom to someone, and in a similar fashion the biblical Moses is clearly receiving exactly the same items of tribute from someone. So was this two independent reports of the same event? The third century BC Egyptian historian Manetho is often derided as being an unreliable reporter, however he clearly asserts that the above scenario was historically correct for the Hyksos people and their exodus from Egypt:

The [Theban] pharaoh attacked the walls [of Avaris] with an army of 480,000 men, and endeavoured to reduce [the Hyksos] to submission by siege. Despairing of achieving his object, he concluded a TREATY under which they were all to evacuate Egypt and go whither they would unmolested. Upon these terms no fewer than 240,000 families with their possessions, left Egypt and traversed the deserts to Syria [later explained as being Jerusalem].

Clearly there was an ancient tradition that indicated that the Hyksos were bought off by the Theban Egyptians with a large tribute of precious metals and materials just before their exodus from Egypt. But what of the Israelite traditions? If the Israelites were the Hyksos peoples, as the historian Josephus says, then surely their traditions should say something similar? This is not only sound reasoning, but it also seems to be remarkably correct. The biblical texts say of this same event:

Speak now in the ears of the [Israelites], and let every man borrow of his neighbour [the Egyptians] ... jewels of silver and jewels of gold. And the Lord gave the [Israelites] favour in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they ’lent them such things as they required. And they spoiled the Egyptians.

They [the Egyptians] also honoured the Hebrews with gifts; some in order to get them to depart quickly, and others on account of their neighbourhood and the friendship they had with them.

The Israelites, like their alter-egos the Hyksos, were apparently given a financial inducement to leave Egypt; and like the Hyksos, the Israelites also set off on a great exodus across hostile territory towards the city of Jerusalem. How many coincidences do we need before it is recognised that the Hyksos were the Israelites?
If the tributes mentioned in the Bible were really those that were mentioned on the Tempest Stele, then the reparations also seem to have included the expensive materials that were specifically required for the construction of the mobile Egyptian temple, known to Israelite history as the Tabernacle, and also for the construction of the Ark of the Covenant. It seems highly likely, therefore, that the gold, silver, oil and cloth mentioned on the Tempest Stele, was being donated to the Hyksos/Israelites by Ahmose I as an inducement for them to leave the country. Any nation as deeply religious as the Hyksos/Israelites would have needed a mobile temple before even contemplating their long journey across the Sinai.

What we seem to have in the Tempest Stele is not only an account of the biblical plagues, but also an account of the beginning of the Hyksos/Israelite exodus and how it was organised and implemented by the two parties involved in the dispute. Although the biblical and the historical accounts of the exodus both hint darkly about a great deal of looting, pillaging and murder of the (Theban) Egyptians by the Israelites/Hyksos, it can now be seen that these apparently independent Israelite and Egyptian records both strongly allude to a diplomatic agreement between the parties involved; with substantial financial reparations being given to the impending Israelites/Hyksos refugees.

This has been just a small snippet of the Tempest Stele analysis that is detailed more fully in the book "Tempest & Exodus", and I hope it will stimulate some interesting debate and comments. This booklet will be revised, expanded and published as a complete book sometime in the near future.

For more details, see Edfu Books | Books by Ralph Ellis

Egypt: Tempest & Exodus: The Biblical Exodus Inscribed on an Ancient Egyptian Stele

Edited by Buzsaw, : Edit to add link

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

This message is a reply to:
	Message 30 by Brian, posted 09-15-2006 10:26 AM		Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 32 by Brian, posted 09-18-2006 2:07 PM		Buzsaw has replied

Brian

Member (Idle past 4985 days)

Posts: 4659

From: Scotland

Joined: 10-22-2002

Brian Posts Only

Message 32 of 52 (349987)
09-18-2006 2:07 PM

Reply to: Message 31 by Buzsaw
09-15-2006 9:28 PM

Nothing but a sale' pitch!

Hi Buz,

I had a look over your post and all I can really say is that it says very little. There is nothing at all of any real substance and certainly nothing that has been referenced or supported. In fact, where I would expect some kind of reference (for example the chapters and verses of the Bible that are said to be identical to the stele) they are just not included.

Much of what has been posted is just the author’s opinion with nothing at all to examine.

Let me give some examples of what I would expect to find in this extract if I was grading a student’s paper.

“Jesus, last of the Pharaohs”

Right away the BS detector goes wild! The title gives a clue to the quality and genre of the book. It really doesn’t give much hope that the source is interested in any critical investigation and is more than likely one of these “van Danikenesque” conspiracy theory paperbacks.

To me, the parallel texts were far too close to each other to be the result of coincidence; they had to be one and the same event.

Okay, that’s fine, it is the author’s opinion that they had to be one and the same event. Points off though for making a basic error that no historian should make an absolute claim, historians simply do not do this because we do not know what could be found in the future that would falsify a theory. Thus, no decent historian would ever claim that anything HAD to be.

Also, if the parallel texts are too close to each other then let us see the texts in question so we can make our own conclusions. What biblical texts, for example, are ”identical’ to which stele text? BTW, identical means exactly the same, so I would be interested in the reason why no scholar that has been examining the text noticed a ”large section’ of biblical text in the middle of an Egyptian stele. I would also be very interested in seeing how a hieroglyphic text is identical to a Hebrew one.

What was the Tempest Stele called before it was called the Tempest Stele?

had been translated and poured over by Egyptologists and historians alike for over 30 years, yet nobody seems to have noticed the fact that a large section of the text was identical to sections in the Torah, Bible and Koran.

Which Egyptologists have been “pouring” over it, a few names would be expected. The same goes for historians, which historians, when did they look at it, what was their conclusions? This paragraph is meaningless.

It seemed impossible that these people had not spotted it before, but there again, perhaps they were not in the right frame of mind to accept such a finding even if it were noticed.

The author’s bias becomes apparent, he is obviously trying to make a few bucks out of people who are not familiar with the material, and we also see that his investigation is not a critical one.

Ahmose

Okay, the author says ”evidently’, what is this evidence, does it solely consist of this on text? Is there external evidence to support the claim? Is it possible that the text was not to be taken literally?

Climatically speaking, southern, or Upper Egypt can be thought of as being in the midst of the Sahara desert, and although the occasional desert thunderstorm will create a flash flood every decade or so, the area is otherwise bone dry. Ahmoses account of a raging nationwide tempest of rain continuing without cessation and being louder than a waterfall at Aswan, can therefore be considered to be highly unusual in this region.

If indeed the events described in the stele did happen and we do not have the recording of a dream or vision.

Well, is it in the Torah Exodus, and if it is what identical verses have I to examine to comment on? This is not even high school quality work Buz, it is just a little soundbite to sell a book, I am utterly bewildered.

The biblical plagues have often been dismissed as being far too late, chronologically speaking, to be coincident with a stele being written by Ahmose I.

Again, no discussion of why the plagues have often been described as too late for Ahmose era, no discussion of the plausibility of the plagues, no mention that 1550 is contrary to the biblical chronology, nothing at all really.

In essence, I agree with the first century historian Josephus when he says that the Israelite exodus was, in fact, the exodus of the Hyksos peoples from Egypt.

Why then does he disagree with Josephus that the pharaoh of the exodus was Thutmosis III, which is in complete agreement with biblical chronology?

The Hyksos exodus has been determined as being in the reign of Ahmose I, which would therefore place the biblical exodus at just the right time for the biblical plagues to be coincident with the Tempest Stele.

But Ahmose reign is contrary to 1 Kings 6:1, and the Hyksos ”Exodus’ was a long drawn out series of events.

Your source offers no other reason for moving the date of the exodus to 1550 other than it fits in with his theory. It is a clear case of circular reasoning. There is no discussion as to why he moves it and no discussion of the problems it causes. For example, how could the Israelites have helped build the city of Rameses in 1550, when there were no pharaohs called Rameses before 1304?

The biblical plagues have a similar theme to that which has been translated from the Tempest Stele:

Which are?

There is nothing in that sentence Buz, it is a pointless and empty claim! Now we also have another problem, ”translated’ from the stele and identical with the biblical texts, what a waste of time.

Okay, let’s have one example of the astonishing similarities between the Hyksos and the Israelites.

Hyksos: Rulers of most of Egypt and they provided the pharaohs for the 15th dynasty.

Israelites: According to the Bible they were slaves. There is no mention of any Israelite becoming a pharaoh.

So, right away we can see that the Hyksos in no way resembled what we are told about the Israelites in the Bible. In fact, they were the complete opposite in social standing that the Israelites were, the Hyksos ruled and provided pharaohs, the Israelites were slaves.

How can these be the same people?

The similarity between these two historical events is perfectly obvious and so it should not be surprising that someone should propose that they are in reality one and the same event.

If they are so perfectly obvious then why not provide us with the evidence, why is there no discussion of why it should be obvious?

But even if they were the same event, what we are not quite so sure of is whether this exodus was initiated by a simple pitched battle followed by a hasty retreat, or whether there was some kind of treaty signed and a more orderly withdrawal initiated.

We know how the Hyksos exit happened, why does your source not mention this?

The constant biblical dialogue between the Israelites and the Egyptians would tend to infer that there was some form of discussion

This is laughable.

Of course the constant dialogue between Moses and the Pharaoh infers there was some form of discussion; in fact it doesn’t infer it at all, it explicitly claims that there was.

You really need to get some better sources Buz. I don't mind going inot a lot of detail, but not for something of this quality.

and possible agreement between the parties and not just outright conflict.

Okay, where is the conflict between the Israelites and the Egyptians in the Bible? Biblical fact, not a single Israelite fought a single Egyptian in the Bible’s version of the Exodus. This is in stark contrast to the abundance of evidence that we have detailing constant battles between the Hyksos and the Egyptians. Heck there is even evidence of a three year campaign against the Hyksos in Palestine long after they left Egypt. Where is the reference to this in the Bible, and doesn’t the bible imply that all of pharaoh’s armies perished in the sea? Who was left to fight after the sea crossing? After the sea event in the Bible we never hear of Egyptians again!

According to the Bible, the Israelites wanted to leave Egypt, but the (Theban) pharaoh would not let them go.

Do we have a biblical reference that claims it was a Theban pharaoh? Another biblical fact is that there is NO mention of who the pharaoh was that enslaved the Hebrews, a very surprising omission from an alleged historical record.

I think the Bible is nearly correct in this, but that the true situation was not that the (Theban) pharaoh would not let them go, but that the he would not agree to their terms.

Why?

Thus the Israelites go back to the pharaoh time and time again asking if he will agree; he accedes at last, but only after there were a number of national calamities (plagues), including deaths among the Egyptian people.

Okay, just a simple repetition of what the Bible says, but again there’s nothing in the way of evidence offered.

So was there a negotiation between the parties and an orderly withdrawal?

You tell us.

Was there an agreement that allowed the Israelites/Hyksos to leave Egypt on their terms, with heads held high and their pockets brimming with gold?

Now we got the big jump to ”Israelites/Hyksos’ without any discussion of the evidence that is supposed to link the two groups.

Tell me, did the Hyksos leave Egypt with their heads held high and their pockets full of gold? If they did, what is the evidence for this?

The Tempest Stele could, just possibly, be a recording just this when it mentions the bounty of gold, silver, copper oil and cloth that was being given to some unknown party.

Some unknown party? I thought we know who the party is, after all it is one and the same event isn't it?

The Theban pharaoh Ahmose I is clearly giving a kings ransom to someone,

How do we know that, there’s no text provided for us to examine.

and in a similar fashion the biblical Moses is clearly receiving exactly the same items of tribute from someone.

Well, you cannot say it was exactly the same items, it may be similar items but it isn’t exactly the same ones!

So was this two independent reports of the same event?

I’m guessing “no”, but when there is something of a decent academic standard presented I will have a better idea.

The third century BC Egyptian historian Manetho is often derided as being an unreliable reporter, however he clearly asserts that the above scenario was historically correct for the Hyksos people and their exodus from Egypt:

What a moronic statement. Manetho is derided for being unreliable yet he is reliable in this instance! He clearly asserts that the above scenario is historically correct, did he not clearly assert that everything else he wrote was historically correct as well?

How can you not see through this guy's sales pitch?

The [Theban] pharaoh attacked the walls [of Avaris] with an army of 480,000 men,

Reference for this as it seem highly unlikely that there existed an army of this size in the time and place your source claims this happened.

and endeavoured to reduce [the Hyksos] to submission by siege. Despairing of achieving his object, he concluded a TREATY under which they were all to evacuate Egypt and go whither they would unmolested.

And this resembles the biblical account in which way?

Upon these terms no fewer than 240,000 families with their possessions, left Egypt and traversed the deserts to Syria [later explained as being Jerusalem].

How many families does the Bible say left Egypt?

But it isn’t the only possibility. What was to prevent the biblical authors borrowing another people’s tradition? They clearly borrowed the Flood myth and the Eden myths from other cultures, so it is equally logical that there is at least a possibility that they have plagiarised again.

but it also seems to be remarkably correct. The biblical texts say of this same event:

I don’t see that much of a similarity presented here, it needs much more fleshing out.

The Israelites, like their alter-egos the Hyksos, were apparently given a financial inducement to leave Egypt;

This isn’t how the biblical account goes. The Bible clearly states that the inducement was all on pharaoh’s side. Pharaoh was induced to allow the Israelites to leave by the warning that God will keep sending plagues until pharaoh allows them to leave. The Bible claims that the Israelites were commanded by God to be prepared to leave Egypt, it says nothing about them hanging around until there was some material deal struck with pharaoh. I have no idea how your source arrives at his conclusions.

and like the Hyksos, the Israelites also set off on a great exodus across hostile territory towards the city of Jerusalem.

Did they? Didn’t the Hyksos have running battles with the Egyptians over a long period of time? Did the Hyksos leave Egypt by the same route?

How many coincidences do we need before it is recognised that the Hyksos were the Israelites?

Maybe if you find one it would help.

How many differences are required to demonstrate that they were not the same people? One reigned over most of Egypt and provided half a dozen pharaohs, the other were slaves that were used as manual labour.

Can they be anymore different?

If the tributes mentioned in the Bible were really those that were mentioned on the Tempest Stele, then the reparations also seem to have included the expensive materials that were specifically required for the construction of the mobile Egyptian temple, known to Israelite history as the Tabernacle, and also for the construction of the Ark of the Covenant. It seems highly likely, therefore, that the gold, silver, oil and cloth mentioned on the Tempest Stele, was being donated to the Hyksos/Israelites by Ahmose I as an inducement for them to leave the country.

Which is contrary to the biblical account.

Any nation as deeply religious as the Hyksos/Israelites would have needed a mobile temple before even contemplating their long journey across the Sinai.

Does your source know anything about the Hyksos religion? I seriously doubt it.

What we seem to have in the Tempest Stele is not only an account of the biblical plagues,

Can we see the texts?

Although the biblical and the historical accounts of the exodus both hint darkly about a great deal of looting, pillaging and murder of the (Theban) Egyptians by the Israelites/Hyksos,

What? Where does the Bible even hint at this?

it can now be seen that these apparently independent Israelite and Egyptian records

Hold on tiger, how do we know they are independent accounts? How do we know that the biblical texts haven’t been influenced in some way either directly by this stele or indirectly through contemporary traditions?

both strongly allude to a diplomatic agreement between the parties involved; with substantial financial reparations being given to the impending Israelites/Hyksos refugees.

If we are going to debate this Buz, you are really going to have to up greatly improve the quality of your evidence.

There is really nothing of any real substance in this post. It is essentially a sales blurb that presents little or no evidence. Now, I am not saying that the claims in the post cannot be supported, but you need to present the evidence and not just cut and paste claims from a Velikoskian copy cat.

Let’s see something worthwhile Buz please becasue so far there is not a single word to support Israelites in Egypt.

Brian.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 31 by Buzsaw, posted 09-15-2006 9:28 PM		Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 33 by Buzsaw, posted 09-23-2006 8:34 AM	Brian has replied
	Message 43 by Buzsaw, posted 10-13-2006 11:23 PM	Brian has not replied
	Message 44 by Buzsaw, posted 10-20-2006 9:42 PM	Brian has not replied

Buzsaw

Inactive Member

Buzsaw Posts Only

Message 33 of 52 (351552)
09-23-2006 8:34 AM

Reply to: Message 32 by Brian
09-18-2006 2:07 PM

Re: Sales pitch, my foot!

Brian writes:

Much of what has been posted is just the author’s opinion with nothing at all to examine.

It will take more time than I've had lately to address you lengthy message and I will be gone much of today but just a comment about your obvious strategy here. You seem to be to doing your best to demean the significant substance in it. To say that the important information in this ancient discovery is nothing but the book author's opinion with nothing to examine is nothing but incredulous ridicule for the obvious purpose of dimininishing the value of it so far as supporting the Biblical history of the Exodus.

For example, to say that nothing the author says has been referenced or supported is just not true. He quotes from the ancient document itself. What more do you want? I need to head out for the day now. I'll try to get back to some more of your message soon. Thanks for being patient.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

This message is a reply to:
	Message 32 by Brian, posted 09-18-2006 2:07 PM		Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 34 by Brian, posted 09-23-2006 12:53 PM		Buzsaw has replied

Brian

Member (Idle past 4985 days)

Posts: 4659

From: Scotland

Joined: 10-22-2002

Brian Posts Only

Message 34 of 52 (351588)
09-23-2006 12:53 PM

Reply to: Message 33 by Buzsaw
09-23-2006 8:34 AM

Re: Sales pitch, my foot!

To say that the important information in this ancient discovery is nothing but the book author's opinion with nothing to examine is nothing but incredulous ridicule for the obvious purpose of dimininishing the value of it so far as supporting the Biblical history of the Exodus.

What I am saying is that you have not provided the supporting evidence.

What you have provided in your post is nothing but the author's opinion. He may well provide support in his book, but you need to provide this evidence to support your post. For example, there's a claim that some of the text in the stele is IDENTICAL to some passages in the Bible, but you failed to provide the chapters and verses for me to examine. How do I know that some of the text is identical to biblical texts?

For example, to say that nothing the author says has been referenced or supported is just not true. He quotes from the ancient document itself. What more do you want?

Support for what he says is in the text. Another example is that he quotes from the stele and then moves the date of the exodus back to the reign of Ahmoses for no other reason that to support his theory. There is nothing provided to justify moving the exodus back to 1550 bce, much earlier than the Bible claims the exodus happened.

Your post doesn't address the most obvious obstacle, namely that the Hyksos were not slaves, the actually ruled most of Egypt and even provided pharaohs. How obvious an error is this?

Brian.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 33 by Buzsaw, posted 09-23-2006 8:34 AM		Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 35 by Buzsaw, posted 09-24-2006 10:23 AM		Brian has replied

Buzsaw

Inactive Member

Buzsaw Posts Only

Message 35 of 52 (351766)
09-24-2006 10:23 AM

Reply to: Message 34 by Brian
09-23-2006 12:53 PM

Re: Sales pitch, my foot!

Brian writes:

What I am saying is that you have not provided the supporting evidence.

I have provided all the available supporting evidence to the author's hypothesis which is the supporting quotes from the Stele itself. What more do you want? I suppose if you choose to question the accuracy of the Stele quotes you will need to show that these quotes are inaccurate.

Brian writes:

Support for what he says is in the text.

Well then the burden is on you to refute the evidence given rather than keeping on alleging that there's no supporting evidence.

Brian writes:

Another example is that he quotes from the stele and then moves the date of the exodus back to the reign of Ahmoses for no other reason that to support his theory. There is nothing provided to justify moving the exodus back to 1550 bce, much earlier than the Bible claims the exodus happened.

As I have stated before some of the Egyptian timeframes and dates (abe: are) highly questionable which could render a plus or minus of a century quite possible. Then too, much in the Stele has to do with events prior and up to the Exodus. This may or may not necessarily be a factor here as to this date.

Brian writes:

Your post doesn't address the most obvious obstacle, namely that the Hyksos were not slaves, the actually ruled most of Egypt and even provided pharaohs. How obvious an error is this?

That's no obstacle at all. For most of the 400 year sojourn of the Israelites/Hyskos in Egypt they were not slaves but had important roles in Egypt including government roles as per Joseph. Moses himself having the role of an adopted royalty may have had a significant amount of authority prior to his falling out with the Pharoah. The Egyptian account of all this including the Exodus would, of course be skewed to their liking. However the skewing would leave the basics intact as it seems to do.

Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

This message is a reply to:
	Message 34 by Brian, posted 09-23-2006 12:53 PM		Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 36 by Brian, posted 09-24-2006 6:41 PM		Buzsaw has replied

Brian

Member (Idle past 4985 days)

Posts: 4659

From: Scotland

Joined: 10-22-2002

Brian Posts Only

Message 36 of 52 (351884)
09-24-2006 6:41 PM

Reply to: Message 35 by Buzsaw
09-24-2006 10:23 AM

Re: Sales pitch, my foot!

I have provided all the available supporting evidence to the author's hypothesis which is the supporting quotes from the Stele itself. What more do you want?

Buz, you haven't supported anything at all, it is merely the author's opinion you have stated, a cut and paste of his blurb.

I will break this reply into one question at a time just to demonstrate what I mean I will ask you one more time.

To begin with, your source claims that parts of the stele are IDENTICAL to parts of the Bible, which parts of the Bible is he talking about?

Brian.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 35 by Buzsaw, posted 09-24-2006 10:23 AM		Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 37 by Buzsaw, posted 09-25-2006 11:13 PM		Brian has replied

Buzsaw

Inactive Member

Buzsaw Posts Only

Message 37 of 52 (352270)
09-25-2006 11:13 PM

Reply to: Message 36 by Brian
09-24-2006 6:41 PM

Re: Sales pitch, my foot!

Brian writes:

To begin with, your source claims that parts of the stele are IDENTICAL to parts of the Bible, which parts of the Bible is he talking about?

"parts of the Stele are IDENTICAL to parts of the Bible?" Let's examine his wording and see if you're correct here.

comparison quotes writes:

the parallel texts were far too close to each other to be the result of coincidence; they had to be one and the same event. ......
which would therefore place the biblical exodus at just the right time for the biblical plagues to be coincident with the Tempest Stele. ......
The biblical plagues have a similar theme to that which has been translated from the Tempest Stele: ......
The similarity between these two historical events is perfectly obvious and so it should not be surprising that someone should propose that they are in reality one and the same event.

Brian, it's obvious from the above quotes that the following quotes are obviously in the vein of "seen these paragraphs" in similar theme and close proximity.

quote in question writes:

The biblical texts say of this same event:
both strongly allude to a diplomatic agreement between the parties involved; with
I had seen these paragraphs before, not in a book on Egyptology, but in the Bible.

To quote again all the similar quotes is unnecessary. What is necessary is for you to read the numerous similarity quotes/evidence provided and critique any which you wish to challenge.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

This message is a reply to:
	Message 36 by Brian, posted 09-24-2006 6:41 PM		Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 38 by Brian, posted 09-26-2006 3:43 AM		Buzsaw has replied

Brian

Member (Idle past 4985 days)

Posts: 4659

From: Scotland

Joined: 10-22-2002

Brian Posts Only

Message 38 of 52 (352291)
09-26-2006 3:43 AM

Reply to: Message 37 by Buzsaw
09-25-2006 11:13 PM

Read every text more than once

Brian, it's obvious from the above quotes that the following quotes are obviously in the vein of "seen these paragraphs" in similar theme and close proximity.

Buz, I am used to scrutinising texts (and essays) very closely, and although no one is perfect, I do not normally make simple mistakes like the one you believe I made.

The author's claim that a large section of the stele text was IDENTICAL to parts of the Bible immediately drew my attention, it is something like this that really interests me so I tend to check these things a few times before posting. I am used to having to check and recheck what I write, and I didn't make a mistake here either. Yes, the author makes the claims that you say he did, the 'similar themes' and the 'similarity' quotes support this, but in message 31, the one with the long quote, I read this:

The "Tempest Stele", as it came to be known known, had been translated and poured over by Egyptologists and historians alike for over 30 years, yet nobody seems to have noticed the fact that a large section of the text was identical to sections in the Torah, Bible and Koran. It seemed impossible that these people had not spotted it before, but there again, perhaps they were not in the right frame of mind to accept such a finding even if it were noticed.

He explicitly claims that there are sections of the Bible that are IDENTICAL to a large section of the stele text.

Am I correct, or does the author not claim that some of the stele text is identical to parts of the Bible?

To quote again all the similar quotes is unnecessary. What is necessary is for you to read the numerous similarity quotes/evidence provided and critique any which you wish to challenge.

Again, I must be missing something, so I'll apologise for asking if you could point me to which quotes from the Bible are similar to the stele's claims.

You may see that the author claims that there are similarities but what biblical texts am I supposed to be looking at to compare with the stele?

I do not see a single chapter or verse mentioned in the author's blurb.

As an example of what I mean, this quote:

now then ... the gods declared their discontent. The gods [caused] the sky to come in a tempest of r[ain], with darkness in the western region and the sky being unleashed without [cessation, louder than] the cries of the masses, more powerful than [...], [while the rain raged] on the mountains louder than the noise of the cataract which is at Elephantine.

Okay, he quotes from the stele, then he goes on to say:

What I am asking for, and what I mean by the lack of supporting references, is that your author simply makes an assertion in the form of the rhetorical question " Was the Israelite equivalent of the stele the second book of the Torah Exodus?"

Well was it? Have we to read the entire book of Exodus to look for the similarity that he is talking about?

No, we shouldn't need to do that, he needs to provide the chapter and verse(s) to support his claim.

This continues throughout your quote, nothing is supported at all, it is all author's opinion. As I said, perhaps he has provided detailed references in his book, but it is your job to provide this evidence.

As it is, there is really nothing here of an academic standard that is worth commenting on.

I tell all my students that they MUST support EVERYTHING they write, or they will be marked down for it. There is nothing in the quote that is supported to any decent standard, it is all his opinion.

So, I will ask again, which parts of the Bible are IDENTICAL to the large section of the stele?

If you don't know then that's fair enough, we can move on to something esle. I am not going to make a song and dance about it.

Brian.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 37 by Buzsaw, posted 09-25-2006 11:13 PM		Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 39 by Buzsaw, posted 09-26-2006 8:59 AM		Brian has replied

Buzsaw

Inactive Member

Buzsaw Posts Only

Message 39 of 52 (352341)
09-26-2006 8:59 AM

Reply to: Message 38 by Brian
09-26-2006 3:43 AM

Re: Read every text more than once

Brian writes:

Buz, I am used to scrutinising texts (and essays) very closely, and although no one is perfect, I do not normally make simple mistakes like the one you believe I made.

The "Tempest Stele", as it came to be known known, had been translated and poured over by Egyptologists and historians alike for over 30 years, yet nobody seems to have noticed the fact that a large section of the text was identical to sections in the Torah, Bible and Koran. It seemed impossible that these people had not spotted it before, but there again, perhaps they were not in the right frame of mind to accept such a finding even if it were noticed.

He explicitly claims that there are sections of the Bible that are IDENTICAL to a large section of the stele text.

Am I correct, or does the author not claim that some of the stele text is identical to parts of the Bible?

I have identified your error but you obviously choose to ignore my points which was that the author clearly shows what he meant by those words like identical. I have quoted several segments which clearly show that what he meant to convey by those words is that the context of the events were identical such as the exodus of both the Hyskos and the Israelites being accompanied by the treasures of gold jewelry et al. Granted he could have used better wording. Nevertheless, you cannot deny that the context of his message at large did not mean to claim the precise wording was identical. This is very clear by the very quotes he gave which were obviously not identical wording and phrasing.

Brian writes:

Again, I must be missing something, so I'll apologise for asking if you could point me to which quotes from the Bible are similar to the stele's claims.

You may see that the author claims that there are similarities but what biblical texts am I supposed to be looking at to compare with the stele?

I do not see a single chapter or verse mentioned in the author's blurb.

As an example of what I mean, this quote:

Okay, he quotes from the stele, then he goes on to say:

What I am asking for, and what I mean by the lack of supporting references, is that your author simply makes an assertion in the form of the rhetorical question " Was the Israelite equivalent of the stele the second book of the Torah Exodus?"

Well was it? Have we to read the entire book of Exodus to look for the similarity that he is talking about?

No, we shouldn't need to do that, he needs to provide the chapter and verse(s) to support his claim.

As it is, there is really nothing here of an academic standard that is worth commenting on.

I tell all my students that they MUST support EVERYTHING they write, or they will be marked down for it. There is nothing in the quote that is supported to any decent standard, it is all his opinion.

So, I will ask again, which parts of the Bible are IDENTICAL to the large section of the stele?

If you don't know then that's fair enough, we can move on to something esle. I am not going to make a song and dance about it.

Brian.

The quote you cite is the most obscure of them all, so it doesn't surprise me that you cite it. It appears that he is aluding to the flood of Genesis and not Exodus. I agree that he should have made this more clear. However you obviously seem to want to throw out the baby with the bathwater by alleging that there's nothing here when in fact he has cited the other more obvious similarities such as the jewelry, the negotiations before the exodus, the failure of the Egyptian army to anhilate and the exodus of both at about the same period.

BTW, we know where the Israelites went. Question: Where did the Hyskos go?

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

This message is a reply to:
	Message 38 by Brian, posted 09-26-2006 3:43 AM		Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 40 by Brian, posted 10-03-2006 8:50 AM	Buzsaw has not replied
	Message 41 by Brian, posted 10-05-2006 7:05 AM	Buzsaw has replied

Brian

Member (Idle past 4985 days)

Posts: 4659

From: Scotland

Joined: 10-22-2002

Brian Posts Only

Message 40 of 52 (353836)
10-03-2006 8:50 AM

Reply to: Message 39 by Buzsaw
09-26-2006 8:59 AM

Re: Read every text more than once

I have identified your error but you obviously choose to ignore my points which was that the author clearly shows what he meant by those words like identical.

I know what the word 'identical' means, and the fact remains, your source used it improperly. You cannot say something is 'identical' then go on to say that it isn't!

The fact that there is nothing identical in the text to something in the Bible just supports the fact that your source is a sensationalist, which was evident from the title of the book, Jesus the Last Pharaoh!

Have you read some of the nonsense this guy has written Buz?

I have quoted several segments which clearly show that what he meant to convey by those words

Not 'words' Buz , but WORD, he said 'identical' when you are saying he meant nearly identical!

is that the context of the events were identical

Nope. Nothing to do with the context of the events, he clearly referred to the text of the stele being identical to the text of the Bible, nothing at all is suggested about context. Read it again.

such as the exodus of both the Hyskos and the Israelites being accompanied by the treasures of gold jewelry et al.

So, quote the text and the bible verses so that we can compare them, otherwise this is just nothing.

These haven't been demonstrated The quote you cite is the most obscure of them all, so it doesn't surprise me that you cite it. It appears that he is aluding to the flood of Genesis and not Exodus. I agree that he should have made this more clear.

It appeared to me that he was describing one of the plagues, but if you aren't sure what your source is on about how am I supposed to know?

After all, it is your source.

However you obviously seem to want to throw out the baby with the bathwater by alleging that there's nothing here when in fact he has cited the other more obvious similarities such as the jewelry, the negotiations before the exodus, the failure of the Egyptian army to anhilate and the exodus of both at about the same period.

But, yet again, and I will keep asking for them, which Bible verses are you talking about, which verse are 'similar' to which parts of the stele?

Also,where do you get the idea that the Egyptians failed to anhialte the Hyksos? I thought it was common knowledge that Ahmoses routed the Hyksos out of Egypt.

You have also failed to demonstrate that the Exodus took place in 1550 BCE, you need much more than the circular reasoning of your source to demonstrate that.

For example, what evidence do you have of Ahmoses' armies being slaughtered in the 'Red Sea'?

You do know that you are essentially contradicting Wyatt's discovery at Aqaba, the Wyatt site claims that:

On diving down to the sea bed, in 1978, Ron Wyatt and his two sons found and photographed numerous coral encrusted chariot parts. Several dives since then have revealed more and more evidence. One of his finds included an eight spoke chariot wheel, which Ron took to the director of Egyptian Antiquities, Dr. Nassif Mohammed Hassan. After examining it he immediately announced it to be of the eighteenth dynasty, dating the exodus to 1446 BC. When asked how he knew this Dr. Hassan explained that the eight spoke wheel was only used during this period, the time of Ramases II and Tutmoses (Moses).

You have personally psoted contradictory information here at the forum, from HERE

This Pharoah who was killed with his army in the Gulf of Aqaba (spelling?) had the name of Tutmosa after whom Moses, his adopted son was named. Some claim Moses was groomed to be heir to the throne before he defected to the Israelites, but don't know about that.

Now, Tutmosa, or Thutmosis, lived after Ahmoses' so you have contradicted yourself. We know that Ahmoses routed the Hyksos from Egypt, and we know he didn't die in the 'Red Sea', so you have your work cut out to make the Hyksos/Israelite connection.

In message 3 of the same thread you claim:

LOL. It was King Tutmoses who drowned. King Tut as we know him was the son of Tutmoses who Moses was named after.

Now if Moses was named after Thutmosis then the Hyksos are long gone as Ahmoses reined before any Thutmosis came to the throne. So, how can the so-called 'negotiations' in the Stele that were so 'similar' to the biblical texts be the same negotiations that Moses conducted with the pharaoh?

How can Moses have negotiated with Ahmoses when Ahmoses was long dead? The stele has Ahmoses in negotiations withe the Hyksos, who does the Bible have Moses in negotiations with?

Doesn't it matter that your sources contradict each other?

BTW, we know where the Israelites went.

What Israelites would this be Buz? The ones that you havent shown existed yet?

Question: Where did the Hyskos go?

Research more on Ahmoses and you will find out!

I'd like to try and move the debate on a little instead of getting bogged down in this Velikovskianesue hearsay.

So, you wish to equate the Hyksos with the Israelites, let me see your evidence for doing so.

Brian.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 39 by Buzsaw, posted 09-26-2006 8:59 AM		Buzsaw has not replied

Brian

Member (Idle past 4985 days)

Posts: 4659

From: Scotland

Joined: 10-22-2002

Brian Posts Only

Message 41 of 52 (354345)
10-05-2006 7:05 AM

Reply to: Message 39 by Buzsaw
09-26-2006 8:59 AM

Re: Read every text more than once

Buz,

Just to let you know that I am off to Barcelona early saturday morning and will be back early next Friday 13th.

Just in case you are working on a reply at the moment, there's no hurry to post it.

Brian.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 39 by Buzsaw, posted 09-26-2006 8:59 AM		Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 42 by Buzsaw, posted 10-06-2006 1:37 PM		Brian has not replied

Buzsaw

Inactive Member

Buzsaw Posts Only

Message 42 of 52 (354796)
10-06-2006 1:37 PM

Reply to: Message 41 by Brian
10-05-2006 7:05 AM

Re: Read every text more than once

Thanks, Brian. Have a good and enjoyable trip.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 41 by Brian, posted 10-05-2006 7:05 AM		Brian has not replied

Buzsaw

Inactive Member

Buzsaw Posts Only

Message 43 of 52 (356426)
10-13-2006 11:23 PM

Reply to: Message 32 by Brian
09-18-2006 2:07 PM

Re: Relevant Evidence, Nevertheless.

Brian writes:

Regardless of how accurate the author described the references in question, the important thing relative to this debate is that significant and unique similarity in the accounts are revealed in the inscriptions. I'm sure you're well aware of the Biblical references being alluded to without my having to look them up for you. These quotes have both to do with Biblical flood accounts and with the accounts of the exodus of a large number of people who were given treasures before they departed.

Brian writes:

Much of what has been posted is just the author’s opinion with nothing at all to examine.

Maybe so, but your problem is what to do with the significant ones.

Brian writes:

Again, you're probably correct in that there's a lot of exaggerations and added stuff et al, but when significant evidence is laced into myth, one shouldn't discard the significant evidence with the obvious myth.

Brian writes:

Okay, that’s fine, it is the author’s opinion that they had to be one and the same event. Points off though for making a basic error that no historian should make an absolute claim, historians simply do not do this because we do not know what could be found in the future that would falsify a theory. Thus, no decent historian would ever claim that anything HAD to be.

Granted.

Brian writes:

Again, similar is the word that should have been used. It wasn't, but that does not negate the similarity. You have that to address.

What was the Tempest Stele called before it was called the Tempest Stele?

Ahmose
The Tempest Stele was erected by the pharaoh Ahmose I at the beginning of the eighteenth dynasty of Egypt, which equates to about 1550 BC. The stele derives its dramatic title from the great storms that it details, which evidently struck Egypt during the reign of Ahmose I.

If indeed the events described in the stele did happen and we do not have the recording of a dream or vision.

... now then ... the gods declared their discontent. The gods [caused] the sky to come in a tempest of r[ain], with darkness in the western region and the sky being unleashed without [cessation, louder than] the cries of the masses, more powerful than [...], [while the rain raged] on the mountains louder than the noise of the cataract which is at Elephantine.
This was certainly a notable occurrence, it was not only worthy of an Egyptian stele being cut to record these events, but was it also worthy of a scroll being written too? Was the Israelite equivalent of the stele the second book of the Torah Exodus?

The biblical plagues have often been dismissed as being far too late, chronologically speaking, to be coincident with a stele being written by Ahmose I.

In essence, I agree with the first century historian Josephus when he says that the Israelite exodus was, in fact, the exodus of the Hyksos peoples from Egypt.

Why then does he disagree with Josephus that the pharaoh of the exodus was Thutmosis III, which is in complete agreement with biblical chronology?

But Ahmose reign is contrary to 1 Kings 6:1, and the Hyksos ”Exodus’ was a long drawn out series of events.

I admit there's controversial arguments about which ruler was who and dates. It appears that both are in the ballpark on dates, but who's to say which if either are the right ones. The important factor nevertheless is the significant similarity in the data we can verify.

....... how could the Israelites have helped build the city of Rameses in 1550, when there were no pharaohs called Rameses before 1304?

I don't know. I suppose the it's possible some dates were off, there were two Rameses cities, one significant to mention and the other not or pharoahs or that the pharoah was named after a city.

Which are?

Check out the link above for the specific Steele quotes and as I've said you're likely familiar with the corresponding similar scriptures.

1. We know from the Biblical text that there was a significant number of other foreigners connected with the Israelites exiting with them. Likely the Egyptians referred to them all by one name.
2. History bears out the destination of the Israel and the folks with them arriving finally at Jerusalem. Since there's no historical data on what happened to anyone but Israel, one may deduce that it was Israel and those accompanying them who were in Egypt and exited as per the accounts if both the Stele and the Bible.

Okay, let’s have one example of the astonishing similarities between the Hyksos and the Israelites.

Hyksos: Rulers of most of Egypt and they provided the pharaohs for the 15th dynasty.

Israelites: According to the Bible they were slaves. There is no mention of any Israelite becoming a pharaoh.

Joseph, we know was a significant ruler and Moses at least a possible prince. There were 400 years, during which we have a limited account. If the Hyskos were Israel, again Egyptology would likely not have called them Israelites.

You don't think the Egyptians would admit to such a humiliating event as the Bible renders do you? This is likely their aliby.

I'm not sure that's the only place the ruler of a nation is not identified. Theban pharoah? Why does the Bible need to say that, necessarily?

Okay, just a simple repetition of what the Bible says, but again there’s nothing in the way of evidence offered.

There is so. How specific do you need to get to call it evidence?

Tell me, did the Hyksos leave Egypt with their heads held high and their pockets full of gold? If they did, what is the evidence for this?

If indeed they were the Israelites as I've shown is likely, I've gone over and over with the evidence which imo implies they were one and the same.

The Tempest Stele could, just possibly, be a recording just this when it mentions the bounty of gold, silver, copper oil and cloth that was being given to some unknown party.

Some unknown party? I thought we know who the party is, after all it is one and the same event isn't it?

Unnamed people in the Biblical account is obviously what I was referring to.
That's all for now. I hope you had a good time and assume you're back by now or soon.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

This message is a reply to:
	Message 32 by Brian, posted 09-18-2006 2:07 PM		Brian has not replied

Buzsaw

Inactive Member

Buzsaw Posts Only

Message 44 of 52 (357864)
10-20-2006 9:42 PM

Reply to: Message 32 by Brian
09-18-2006 2:07 PM

Re: Nothing but a sale' pitch!

Brian writes:

Well, you cannot say it was exactly the same items, it may be similar items but it isn’t exactly the same ones!

Make that similar items attributing any variations to the widely diverse sources as to record keeping and acuracy in reporting.

Brian writes:

Sources considered unreliable by some may, nevertheless have some things right if supported by other sources.

Brian writes:

Reference for this as it seem highly unlikely that there existed an army of this size in the time and place your source claims this happened.

And this resembles the biblical account in which way?

You appear to be acquainted with the Biblical account. If you can't see the similarity, given the liberty Egyptians often took in reporting, I can't help you. Imo, there's obvious similarities in the two accounts.

Brian writes:

How many families does the Bible say left Egypt?

Nobody's going to settle this number thing. It's been gone over and over with relatively little evidence for either side to be dogmatic. There's more substantive debatable stuff for us to address.

Brian writes:

And if the Hyskos were the Israelites and their companions, they were in a sense bought off as per the Bible.

Brian writes:

Again Egyptian historians are'n going to admit mistakes on their part and will skew the info. I keep having to say this but you keep insisting everyting needs to be just alike. Similarity is the word to make sense.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

This message is a reply to:
	Message 32 by Brian, posted 09-18-2006 2:07 PM		Brian has not replied

Buzsaw

Inactive Member

Buzsaw Posts Only

Message 45 of 52 (359618)
10-29-2006 9:07 AM

Re: Reed Sea/Red Sea

It appears we've made our points regarding the Hyksos and I see no resolution as there's only so much to go on for either viewpoint.

Can we move on to the Reed See/Red Sea issue?

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Replies to this message:
	Message 46 by Brian, posted 11-08-2006 4:17 PM		Buzsaw has replied

Date format: mm-dd-yyyy

Timezone: ET (US)

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Do Nothing Button

4 online now:	DrJones*, LamarkNewAge, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), popoi
Newest Member:	ChatGPT
Post Volume:	Total: 916,784 Year: 4,041/9,624 Month: 912/974 Week: 239/286 Day: 46/109 Hour: 0/0