A Working Definition of God

Mike, you're gonna have to go further than simply making an assertion like that. If you know of any mention of Hebrews in Egypt before about 6BC, can you please present it?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

jar, I'm not going to get into the debates of the actual facts until I do more research. However, Richard Hooker demonstrates some interesting information as to why it would be reasonable to conclude that the Hebrews really did dwell around these parts around this time in history:

quote:

---

We can make some guesses about the Hebrews in Egypt, though. It isn't unreasonable to believe that a sizable Hebrew population lived in the north of Egypt from about 1500-1250 BC; enormous numbers of tribal groups, most of them Semitic, had been settling in northern Egypt from about 1800 BC. These foreigners had grown so powerful that for a short time they dominated Egypt, ruling the Egyptians themselves; this period is called the Third Intermediate Period in Egyptian history. When the Egyptians reasserted dominance over Egypt at the start of the New Kingdom, they actively expelled as many foreigners as they could. Life got fairly harsh for these foreigners, who were called "habiru," which was applied to landless aliens (taken from the word, "apiru," or foreigner). Is this where the Hebrews got their name? It's a hotly contested issue. Nevertheless, the New Kingdom kings also began to garrison their borders in the north and east in order to prevent foreigners from entering the country in the first place. In particular, the Egyptian king, Seti I (1305-1290), moved his capital to Avaris at the very north of the Nile delta. This move was a shrewd move, for it established a powerful military presence right at the entrance to Egypt.

​

Garrisoned cities, however, don't pop into existence at a whim; they are labor intensive affairs. Typically, building projects involved heavy taxation of local populations; these taxes took the form of labor taxes. It isn't unreasonable to guess that the heaviest burden of these taxes fell on the foreigners living in the area, which would include the Hebrews. As best as we can guess, we believe that these building projects form the substance of the oppression of the Hebrews described in Exodus.

---

Incidently, just off the top of my head, archeologists digging up settlements from ancient Egypt have unearthed three kinds of sun-dried bricks -- some were made of good straw, some containing mere roots and bits of straw, and some with no straw -- apparently confirming the Scriptural account of slave labour found in Exodus 5:10 and following:

quote:

---

Then the slave drivers and the foremen went out and said to the people, "This is what Pharaoh says: 'I will not give you any more straw. Go and get your own straw wherever you can find it, but your work will not be reduced at all.' " So the people scattered all over Egypt to gather stubble to use for straw. The slave drivers kept pressing them, saying, "Complete the work required of you for each day, just as when you had straw." The Israelite foremen appointed by Pharaoh's slave drivers were beaten and were asked, "Why didn't you meet your quota of bricks yesterday or today, as before?"

​

Then the Israelite foremen went and appealed to Pharaoh: "Why have you treated your servants this way? Your servants are given no straw, yet we are told, 'Make bricks!' Your servants are being beaten, but the fault is with your own people."

​

Pharaoh said, "Lazy, that's what you are-lazy! That is why you keep saying, 'Let us go and sacrifice to the LORD .' Now get to work. You will not be given any straw, yet you must produce your full quota of bricks."

​

Exodus 5:10-18

---

Consequently, now with further research, I might add that lack of evidence does not necessarilly imply that they were not there. This is certainly the case with Akhenaten -- a Pharoah of Egypt --who was nearly wiped of the history books within mere generations of his own rule. In fact, many scholars will admit that we know more about him today than thoese generations that immediately preceeded his own.

quote:

---

Akhenaten

​

We know both little and much about Akhenatenthat is to say, we know enough to wish we knew much more with certaintybut at least the general contours of his biography are clear. Born Amunhotep (IV), Akhenaten ruled Egypt for a mere fourteen years (ca. 1352-1338 BCE), a relatively short reign by the standards of the day. While there is no record of his death nor have any material remains from his burial as yet come to light, it is safe to assume he died in middle age. The cause of his death is not known.

​

The unique and peculiar phase of Egyptian history he engineered is known today as the Amarna periodthe modern Egyptian village of El-Amarna lies near the site that was once Akhenaten's capital cityalthough the Amarna Period extends beyond his reign. It includes not only Akhenaten's regency but several of his successors': Smenkhare (1338-1336 BCE) about whom next to nothing is known; Tutankhuaten (later, Tutankhamun, 1336-1327 BCE) whose current notoriety since the discovery of his tomb in the 1920's far outstrips the boy-king's fame in antiquity; and finally Ay (1327-1323 BCE). By the time the next series of pharaohs held the throneHoremheb (1323-1295 BCE) and the Ramessids, a dynasty which included the famous Ramses IIAmarna had been abandoned and destroyed, along with the memory of Akhenaten's religion in the general conscience of the ancient Egyptian public. This deliberate attempt to eradicate all reference in the Egyptian record to the Amarna period was nearly successful, but not quite.

​

We do know about Akhenaten, in fact, probably quite a bit more than the ancient Egyptians did who lived even just a few generations after the monotheist's rule. In spite of the fact that there is virtually no reference in later Egyptian historical records to Akhenaten's existence, or his immediate successors'it's hard to find even hints of his religion in subsequent Egyptian culturearchaeology has brought Amarna culture back to light with astounding clarity and depth. As with Pompeii, because of its near-total obliteration more is now known about Akhenaten's regime than almost any other period during the New Kingdom of Egypt, a fact Ramses would, no doubt, not be very happy to hear.

---

Incidently, when one opens the Hebrew Scriptures to Psalm 104, the great manifesto of God's all-encompassing power, and read how God created grass for cattle to eat, and trees for birds to nest in, and the sea for ships to sail and fish to swim in:

quote:

---

Bless the Lord....you who coverest thyself with light as with a garment....
Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters;....
He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and....the trees
Where the birds make their nests; as for the stork, the fir trees are her house.
The high hills are a refuge for the wild goats;....
(As) the sun ariseth, (the beasts) gather themselves together....
There go the ships: there is that leviathan (whale), whom thou hast made to play therein.

---

And then among the remains of Amarna culture you find the Hymn to the Aten, purportedly written by Akhenaten himself, and it says:

quote:

---

When the land grows bright and you are risen from the Akhet (horizon) and shining in the sun-disk by day,....
All flocks (are) at rest on their grasses, trees and grasses flourishing;
Birds flown from their nest, their wings in adoration of your life-force;
All flocks prancing on foot, all that fly and alight living as you rise for them;
Ships going downstream and upstream too, every road open at your appearance;
Fish on the river leaping to your face, your rays even inside the sea. (trans. James P. Allen)

---

The similarity is simply astounding. It seems incontrovertible that cultural exchange from Egypt to Israel or Israel to Egypt transpired somehow. Even though most historians would conclude that Israel borrowed from Egypt, it yet remains fairly evident that there were at least some points of contact between the Israel culture and the Egyptian culture -- and around the same time that most scholars suspect that the account of the Exodus emerged in history at that.This message has been edited by Magisterium Devolver, 04-19-2005 06:51 PM

Well, first, semitic people. That in no way implies Hebrews. So there is nothing more than assertion there.Second, the matter of the bricks might be of some interest if it were documented (I've seen that allegation but it's never attributed or supported by evidence) but even then it is pretty damn weak support when there is simply no other evidence of either a large hebrew population, an Exodus, or any support of an entrance into Cannaan.The earliest documented case I know of for the presence of Hebrews in Egypt is from a scarab dating from around 6BC.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Doesn't the Rosetta stone mention Hebrews? (aslo thanks to Magisterium Devolver for input)

What about the reference to the foreign 'habiru' noted in the quote:

quote:

---

When the Egyptians reasserted dominance over Egypt at the start of the New Kingdom, they actively expelled as many foreigners as they could. Life got fairly harsh for these foreigners, who were called "habiru," which was applied to landless aliens (taken from the word, "apiru," or foreigner). Is this where the Hebrews got their name?

---

The author noted that it's a hotly contested issue, however, this name "habiru" seems to be very similar to the "Hebrew" name -- and it's not entirely out of the scope of the discussion to note that language changes over time.Even Moses' name was actually an Egyptian name before it was converted into the Hebrew language. This is to saym his name changed from the original Egyptian as it was not originally a Hebrew name.I'm not saying this is definite evidence. However, it's not entirely outside the scope of a reasonable possibility either.I will research the issue of the bricks.

Nope. But even if it did, it dates from around 196BC, over a thousand years after the alleged Exodus.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Jar, I know a stone of some type definitely mentioned an early Israel people. I have searched to no end.What we do know is that the city of Rameses is found, as you people keep ignoring. You seem to ignore any evidence which might favour an Exodus.

Ah, the old "habiru" or "ibiru" or "Hapiru" gambit.Actually that's some of the strongest evidence that the Exodus and conquest of Canaan never happened.There was no one people called the Hibiru, but instead it was a somewhat derogotry name used similar to "gypsy" to refer to homeless wanderers and brigands. They don't seem to have any one ethnicity and certainly no organization or structure. And they are discussed over many, many centuries in locations from Egypt in the south to the upper reaches of Mesopotamia. It was term common to Egypt, Sumeria, Akaadian, Hittite and Mittani civilizations.They were often hired as mercenaries and get discussed quite often in the Amarna letters.The Amarna letters are important; they were written at about the time Joshua was supposedly conquering Canaan. Sadly, none of the heads of the city states there seemed to notice, even those ruling cities he had supposedly destroyed. But the Hapiru are mentioned. They were being hired by the different heads of the City-States in a series of inter-city wars that were going on at the time. Sometimes they are on one side, often then on the other. But nowhere are they seen or shown as a unified, organized or even particular nation.You can read the Amarna Letters here.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Mike, there are references but they date from the time of the Kingdoms on. Nothing early. And finding a city called Ramses is not really adding any weight.Folk...We are getting way away from the subject.While the Exodus myth is interesting, it has NOTHING to do with this thread.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Okay, I can't even think of a sarcastic response to this nonsense. I asked a question. As of yet, no one's given a complete or coherent answer. How that adds up to me dropping the ball, I don't know.
=====
But don't worry... I'm sure you have mountains of evidence to support the existence of... I dunno, whatever this thing's supposed to be.

---

I gave you the barest beginnings of a definition of God according to Christian theology. Whole books are written on "The Attributes of God." But there's no point in contributing more information until you make it clearer what you are after here.You lopped off the parts of my definition that referred to His actions. Well, it's your topic, so if you want to limit it that way, I have no problem with it. But then you said some comic book character fit what was left, as if that were relevant to anything, and then disappeared. What's your point? Are you just looking for an excuse to mock definitions of God or what? You don't need to have a thread for that purpose you know; people do it quite freely around here.You got my definition and you got "I Am" from jar, and you got "God is Love" from somebody. Where do you want to take this?

If you mean that it disproves that the 'habiru' term applied solely and distinctly to the Hebrew descendents of the Abram (later Abraham) -- then I wholeheartedly agree.However, that's not what I'm suggesting. Exactly. And that's exactly my point.I'm not trying to suggest that the 'habiru' was unique to Abraham and his descendants. I'm suggesting, provided the names can genuinely be traced to one another, that the term 'habiru' was adopted from the broader Egyptian culture by Abraham's descendants and made into a distinctly Hebrew feature probably sometime aroud Moses.I've already noted how words can change as they are transformed into new languages -- even those languages that are very similar.Even more so, as I already noted above, Abram changed his name to Abraham as a sign in and of itself to God's calling.Likewise Moses' original name was most likely Egyptian. When the name Mose appears by itself, as it occasionally does in Egyptian, it simply means "the Child" or "the Offspring." But in Egyptian, Mose most frequently appears along with the name of a god as part of a compound name.Moses' Hebrew name was Moshe, the true meaning of which is now unknown.Some relate the name to the Hebrew word mashah, which means "drawn out" a reference to the story of his having been drawn out of the water where his mother had placed him in a reed basket to save him from the death that had been decreed by the Pharaoh against the firstborn of all of the children of Israel in Egypt. This is found in the Hebrews Scriptures of Exodus 2:10.One Jewish source, however, says that the name he was given by by the daughter of the Pharaoh was Miniot, which meant "taken out" in Egyptian, and that Moshe was a translation of this Egyptian name into Hebrew.Some have seen in this story a parallel with the story of Sargon of Assyria who was also said to have been drawn from the water as an infant:

quote:

---

Sargon, strong king, king of Agade, am I. My mother was a high priestess, my father I do not know. My paternal kin inhabit the mountain region. My city (of birth) is Azupiranu, which lies on the bank of the Euphrates. My mother, a high priestess, conceived me, in secret she bore me. She placed me in a reed basket, with bitumen she caulked my hatch. She abandoned me to the river from which I could not escape. The river carried me along: to Aqqi, the water drawer, it brought me. Aqqi, the water drawer, when immersing his bucket lifted me up. Aqqi, the water drawer, raised me as his adopted son. Aqqi, the water drawer, set me to his garden work. During my garden work, Istar loved me (so that) 55 years I ruled as king. (Lewis, 1978)

---

Alternatively, as I began to note above, some authorities have pointed to the fact that Exodus 2:10 says that Pharaoh's daughter "made him her son," as a possible reference to another source for his name.During the eighteenth dynasy of Egypt, the suffix -mose was a common element in names and meant "son of." This Egyptian naming convention is illustrated in names from the period such as Thut-mose ("son of Toth") and Ra-moses ("son of Ra"). According to this view, the name Moshe would simply be a transliteration into Hebrew of a longer Egyptian name that ended in -mose.Suffice it to say, if any of these things are true, then a link with Egyptian culture again seems to be implied.Regardless of how Moses actually acquired his name, it should be noted that many times in the Scriptures names are changed or adopted in order to signify a great change has occurrd. Examples of this could even include Saul of Tarsus changing his name to Paul.Likewise, regardless of his orginal name, Moses was eventually known as Moshe within the Hebrew language itself.Interestingly enough, the name 'Hebrew' itself seems to be partially influenced by the word 'eber' which seems to litterally mean something akin to 'beyond, on the other side'.However, when one looks at the Semitic language itself, the term Hebrew can more readilly be traced from the Semitic word 'habiru' -- which clearly means 'wanderer' in the derogatory sense.As Dr. Orville Boyd Jenkins notes, Abraham may have been part of a broader movement of "habiru" migrating or nomadic peoples referred to in various contemporary sources.Now some may hold that the term 'habiru' was solely distinct to Abraham's descendants and eventually was changed over time to the 'Hebrew' we see today -- but I don't think the current body of evidence supports this conclusion.However, if one see this 'habiru' derogatory name as being part of the broader Egyptian culture -- and that it was adopted and transformed by the descendents of Abrham during Moses' time into the elevated 'Hebrew' we are familar with today, then I still think this link still holds much promise.In one sense, it certainly jives with one of the central messages of the gospel in the sense that, although he can certainly do so, God generally does not call the wise: Consequently God calling a desert wanderer from amongst a group of migrating or nomadic peoples (as referred to in various contemporary sources) in order to shame the powers-that-be seems to fit exactly in line with his modus operandi -- his unvarying or habitual method of procedure.In I Peter 2:15, we see a similar concept being expressed when he says, "For it is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men."Indeed, Christ's death on the cross is itself seen within this very same context -- foolish by the standards of the world.Although some would disagree, many Christians do beleive that these ideas are expressed as well within the Hebrew Scriptures. Even more so, although there is some debate as to exactly whom this passage is directed at, the following Hebrew Scriptures definitely can be identified with God chosing the lowly in order to shame the wise: That many Christians identify this passage as being a prophecy in regards to Christ's suffering in order to redeem us is a given.However, for the sake of this discussion in regards to the 'habiru' link, I think it might be overlooking the more important fact that many modern day Israelites more readilly identify this passage with their own Hebrew people throughout the course of human history -- which speaks volumes in itself about God's modus operandi. Thank you.But, in doing this, I'm not sure if you've necessarilly disproved anything that I've suggested here. We both agree that 'habiru' -- if indeed there is a link to 'Hebrew' -- was almost certainly not a name which was distinct to Abraham's descendents alone.In fact, if I'm reading this correctly, your link seems to reinforce what I was already suggesting. At the very least, the body of evidence certainly seem to leave open the possibilty of the term 'habiru' being adopted from the broader Egyptian culture by Abraham's descendants -- and made into a distinctly Hebrew feature probably sometime aroud Moses.This message has been edited by Magisterium Devolver, 04-20-2005 05:31 AM

Well, if you want to discuss this further you might want to start yet another thread on the subject. It's certainly been one of interest here and has come up often.But it has nothing to do with this thread.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

meh -- not interested. Though if someone else wants to start a new topic for this OP discussion, I'll probably partake in it.I've been side-tracked by this thread anyway. I'm going to be posting back to the pseudo-science discusion I started before.Take care Dan's Clever Alias. Hope you find whatever answers you're looking for.

quote:

---

Jar, I know a stone of some type definitely mentioned an early Israel people. I have searched to no end.

---

You are referring to the Merneptah Stele which is the first and only egyptian inscription to reference Israel.It's only a brief phrase "Israel is wasted, bare of seed"but it is there nonetheless and it dates to the traditional time of Exodus circa 13th century BCE

quote:

---

You never know who's reading and may get the point in spite of this nutty naturalistic dogma here.

​

Hmm, the idea of verifiable, reliable cause and effect in nature that anyone, regardless of religious belief, can also witness and observe and experience, that ha led to cures for disease, space exploration, vaccinations, and computers.

​

Yeah, that's pretty nutty.

​

Silly, one might say.

---

Totally, when it comes to this topic.It's great for cures for disease, space exploration, vaccinations and computers but it's absolutely irrelevant for knowing anything about God or spirit beings or anything else having to do with spiritual life. It's the wrong tool for the job, and insisting on making it the method and the standard where it is unfitted to the task IS pretty nutty.