Dating the Exodus

The Exodus was most probably in the 1500's BC.

But I could be wrong.

John,This thread is not about getting the right answer. Reread what PaulK had to say. It's really about what kinds of evidence, not opinion, but evidence exist to support the different dates. Right year or wrong, without evidence it's just a number.lfen

Hi WT,I have a few minutes before I go on a day out with some students, so I apologise for this being so short. What is obvious about equating Hebrew and Habiru/’apiru? Also, remember that what is obvious to you may not be obvious to everyone and perhaps those who do not know the obvious connection between Habiru/’apiru and Hebrew would be grateful for an explanation of the said obvious connection. Feel free to provide academic sources that use God as a mechanism, as long as you support how He did it, then that’s fine. So, use God if you wish, just make sure that the background to the intervention is plausible. The reason I want people to explain their claims is so we can all benefit and understand what the arguments have been throughout the history of the debate over the origins of Ancient Israel. I am happy for you to use Velikovsky, but I would like to know what it is about his 50 year old hypothesis that convinces you he is accurate, what evidence does he cite to support his conclusions?Your claims of unsupported assertions makes it look as if you didn’t read my opening post. I did say that I was giving a general outline and then introduce the evidence to support my hypotheses as we went along, working our way through the ten arguments. I did say there was no point in introducing reams of info in the OP, don’t worry, I can support every part of my hypothesis. Well, what miracles was he talking about and what were the catastrophic events (natural ones?) How does an end of the 13th century destruction of Hazor support a 15th century Exodus, surely it supports a 13th century one?The Bible claims in Joshua 11:10-11 At that time Joshua turned back and captured Hazor and put its king to the sword. (Hazor had been the head of all these kingdoms.) Everyone in it they put to the sword. They totally destroyed them, not sparing anything that breathed, and he burned up Hazor itself.So, Joshua is credited in the Bible with bringing the occupation of Hazor to an end, therefore, to support a 1447 date for the exodus you would have to have a total destruction layer and an end of occupation around 1400 BCE, is there archaeological evidence to support a 1400 BCE total destruction of Hazor?Catch you later.Brian.PS, if I am not on here tomorrow it will be because I drank too much tea and ate too many cakes

Just one question Brian.If you're comfortable with disclosing: your age?

Hi Hydarnes,I am very comfortable with disclosing my age, I am 40.Right now I feel about 140! LOLI am never drinking again.Brian.

Yeah, right.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well, it kills brain cells. I hope that's a scientific fact we can both agree on. Besides, I think we need all we can get if we expect to survive in an intellectually active environment.BTW, as much as my language with respect to your literary material might occasionally seem acerbic, I must admit that I hold a deal of respect for you as an opponent (even if I don't agree with your conclusions, you certainly put time and effort into your compositions), and I would like to remind you that all negative comments are strictly confined to the ideological sphere and certainly not personal, although I won't declare absolute abstinence from allowing certain other individuals on this board to, at times, provoke my solar plexus.G'day.This message has been edited by Hydarnes, 08-13-2004 03:51 PMThis message has been edited by Hydarnes, 08-15-2004 11:06 PM

Hi H, The negative comments are water off a duck's back. I have been teaching 11-18 year olds part time for the last 5 years, so when you are used to having a class of 32 x 13 year olds who are not interested in hearing about Jesus, Muhammad, or Buddha your negative comments are barely noticable.I certainly don't mind you calling my ideology into question, I really don't care at all. I would say though that personal comments, and I am as guilty as you are of it, do not make for a very constructive debate. I would rather focus on information rather than the person behind it, because, when all is said and done, neither you nor I know everything.Look after yourself and that 'gammy-legged' brother of yours.Brian.

Hi Brian: What isn't obvious about Hebrew/Habiru/apiru ?In scripture: Eber/Heber/Hebrew.You are asserting contrary to what is obvious BECAUSE the obvious evidences against your position.How is it evolutionists/archaeologists can deduce humanity millions of years old all from a few disputed fossils ?But Hebrew/Habiru/apiru is suddenly confusing lacking any obvious similarity and correlation ?Hebrew/Habiru/apiru would be a first round no-brainer in an I.Q. test.It is better to concede the point rather than insist what we see is not what we see. Did you insinuate that age is synonymous with inaccuracy ?For the time being, the fact that Velikovsky was an agnostic Jew; no belief in miracles/supernatural; wrote to convince Biblical miracles were caused by parallel natural phenomenon; equates to an unbiased objective source.If Velikovsky dated the Exodus in your range you would be making the same argument instead of me. You are right - sorry. Believe me when I say I believe you. Everyone knows you are all about evidence. Because you already took the position that Joshua conquered Hazor in this time period and not Barak/Deborah.According to my sources, Hazor XIII came to an end in the 13th century (c.1242) by the hand of Barak. If it be Barak and not Joshua then this pushes the Exodus back 200? years, certainly into the 15 century.Also, Dr. Adam Rutherford "Treatise on Bible Chronology" [1957] postulated the same dating which Cambridge confirmed.

quote:

---

What isn't obvious about Hebrew/Habiru/apiru ?

​

In scripture: Eber/Heber/Hebrew.

​

You are asserting contrary to what is obvious BECAUSE the obvious evidences against your position.

---

And don't forget that even Frank Moore Cross (arguably the number one epigraphist in the world) said: "I do think that the term Apiru is the origin of the term HebrewDr. Frank Moore Cross, Professor Emeritus Harvard University. (Appearance on The Exodus Revealed)And btw Brian, you'll see an allusion to this in my rebuttal to your stele post: http://EvC Forum: Information -->EvC Forum: InformationHopefully in the near future the admins will validate the proposition so you can have a fair chance at responding.This message has been edited by Hydarnes, 08-13-2004 04:39 PM

Hi WT, good to hear from you. But I still do not know how the equation is made, if it is so easy then you can just tell me. No, not at all, I am saying that there have been great developments in the last 50 years that's all and perhaps some of the developments falsify Velikovsky's theories. I don't know how he arrived at his conclusions, so if you tell me how he did I can analyse them. Yes, according to my sources it did as well.So, if occupation came to an end (Yadin claims about 1220) what city did Joshua bring to an end in 1400 the date required for a 1447 Exodus?Joshua is associated with the 1220 destrcution by Yadin because the Bible says that Joshua's armies destroyed every living thing in it and put the city to the torch. Yadin HAD to associate this 1220 destruction with Joshua because there is no other layer that resembles this utter destruction.If Barak ended the occupation of Hazor, then the biblical account of Joshua's action there is inaccurate.Cheers, catch you later.Brian.

quote:

---

If Barak ended the occupation of Hazor, then the biblical account of Joshua's action there is inaccurate.

---

Incorrect. From my knowledge of Hazor, it was reoccupied several times after a series of destructions and rebuilding that occured.Your argument is wanting.

Hi,And your knowledge is based on what?Brian.

"According to the Biblical narrative, Jabin, the King of Hazor, headed a coalition of Canaanite cities against the advancing Israelites, led by Joshua. The Israelites won the battle and Joshua burned and ravaged the city (Jos. 11:1 - 12)."And Joshua turned back at that time, and took Hazor, and smote its king with the sword: for Hazor formerly was the head of all those kingdoms. Everyone in it they put to the sword. They totally destroyed them, not sparing anything that breathed, and he burned up Hazor itself .. Israel did not burn any of the cities built on their mounds - except Hazor." (Jos 11:10-12)Evidence of this violent destruction by burning was discovered in various areas of excavation of the site. Another Israelite battle, this time against a Canaanite army led by Sisera, Jabin's general, is described in the Book of Judges, Chapter 4."--http://unixware.mscc.huji.ac.il/~hatsor/index.htmThis message has been edited by Hydarnes, 08-13-2004 05:06 PM