Jericho and Ai: Fictional history in the Book of Joshua

(gulp) Sorry,Brian.

Hi Brian !Do you have any interest in discussing the Flood in the Short Subjects Forum ?

Interesting, according to Wyatt and archeologists that support his theories on the Exodus, they date the Exodus to be approximately 1446 B.C.Willowtree, why is it that in one section you say that Exodus occured in 1447 B.C., and then in another section you say 1453 B.C. ?It is interesting to note that Moller mentions this "1446 B.C." to have 25 years of uncertainty, when taking into the account the various uncertainties of dating.So please elaborate, thanks.P.S. Willowtree, I still do not know whether you agree or disagree with the various archeological finds we have mentioned concerning the crossing site a Nuweiba. What are your thoughts?It seems like everytime Brian, PaulK, Buzsaw, and I get going on these topics, all you can do is come in and throw this pyramid puzzle at us which I still do not comprehend. Why would the Egyptians build their pyramid to agree with the Bible???This message has been edited by Lysimachus, 06-22-2004 12:37 PM

---

~Lysimachus

No offense Willowtree, but I don't agree with one bit concerning this Pyramid stuff. Bless your heart for trying to help me with the Exodus event, but it isn't helping me any. This sort of stuff sounds too "mystical" to me, and agrees more with new agers line of thinking, like a portal or something made by aliens.I don't base my beliefs on the Exodus based on mystical ideas like this. I base mine beliefs on archeological, geographical, and time-comparison evidence.Again I raise the question, why on earth would the Egyptians build a pyramid to agree with the Exodus event...an event that was so humiliating to them? And say God allowed them to contruct it like this subconciously. Why would God allow such a message to get across through a paganistic building?I'm sorry, but just can't agree with this spooky stuff.

---

~Lysimachus

quote:

---

Willowtree, why is it that in one section you say that Exodus occured in 1447 B.C., and then in another section you say 1453 B.C. ?

---

I say the Red Sea Exodus happened in 1453 BC.In that other section (as you put it) I quoted Velikovsky who dated the same event to have happened in 1446/7 BC.Velikovsky used the Armana Letters to arrive at his date.Dr. Scott says "archaeology confirms the Pyramid date of 1453 BC and both of these sources confirm the Biblical date." Dr. Scott will also add that Velikovsky came within "6 or 7 years" using neither the Pyramid or archaeology.I tread very softly in Exodus dating debates because I cannot access the research of Dr. Scott presently. This means I cannot cite sources so I remain relatively quiet.If you want to know exactly how the Pyramid dates the Exodus then go to my topic "Proof of God" and read the OP.If you want to discuss it then go to my topic.The relevance of the Exodus in this topic, of course, is that if it happened when I say then Brian's evidence and research says otherwise because there is no archaeological evidence for ancient Ai around 1413 BC.I must respect what Brian evidences until I can produce my evidence and sources.BTW, just because the Pyramid is in Egypt does not mean egyptians built it. Go to my topic if you wish.thanks,WT

Could both events been after 1200BCE?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Velikovsky used the Armana Letters to arrive at his date.

---

Velikovsky also claimed that the manna that fell from heaven was carbohydrate compounds detached from Jupiters rings by a passing (and unknown) 10th planet in a long cometary orbit and 'cooked' to edibility by atmospheric entry.Velikovsky is therefore a kook. What reason do we have for taking his dates seriously?

I will go ahead and read it, but I have high doubts about it. You won't find it easy for me to buy into mystical stuff like this.I also believe someone told me that Ron Wyatt himself investigated this subject about the Pyramid proving the Exodus event, and he concluded that it was a hoax and that there was no truth to it.I'm not basing my doubts because Ron Wyatt may think this, I just don't think God works like that.

---

~Lysimachus

Where is the topic Willowtree? You could at least be so gracious as to give me the link...or AT LEAST tell me what forum it is in....I can't seem to find any topic called "Proof of God".

---

~Lysimachus

Message 1

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Hi Jar, I thought about this myself, but it causes even more problems for the biblical version. Both cities after 1200 BCE were little more than small unfortified villages. After 1200 BCE Ai was an unfortified settlement of about 3 acres, it was finally abandoned around 1050 BCE.We also have to consider the other towns and cities that were said to be destroyed by Joshua's armies. Hazor c. 1250 BCE destruction level, Lachish destruction level c.1150 BCE, Debir c.1230 BCE, Heshbon and Dibon were unoccupied in the late 13th and early 12th centuries BCE.It should also be remembered that the 'Israelites' are not the only reason why cities may have been destroyed. The Egyptians were campaigning heavily during this period, and even earthquakes may have caused some of the destructions, as one scholar said 'The invaders didn't leave calling cards'.We would also have to virtually do away with the period of the Judges.Brian.

I'm not so sure we would have to do away with Judges.Remember, many of these were local tales. They were told within small tribal or family groups, not really a Nation. It is entirely possible that these are all contemporaneous tales, told by differing tribes, that were later combined into one tale with lost of fudge to try to make things fit.This is not at all unusual. When looking at other semi-historical sources, even once far more recent than the events in the Bible, we find just things like that. Arthur is alleged to have fought battles at a time when he would have been well into his 90s, so most likely, the historians have trued to takesome actual event and shoehorn it into the Artur Legend.One of the things that I find convincing about the later date is that it would fit better with a smaller Exodus. The conquest of small, undefended towns by a small, relatively untrained band of nomads is quite possible. You do not need vast armies. In addition, a smaller Exodus would likely go unnoticed by other major powers in the area as would the overthrow of small villages.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

One other thing. By moving the Exodus forward to around 1200 BC we also place it sometime in the 19th Dynasty, after Ramsses I & II, most likely during the reign of either the very short ruling Amenmesses or Seti II. If so, there might even be some support for major internal problems in Egypt at about the time of the Exodus. Amenmesses seems to have come from no where, and most likely was not the actual heir to the throne. If Seti II is actually the Crown Prince Seti-Merneptah, it is possible that there was a coup attempt or that Seti-Merneptah was injusred while on campaign.But in any case, from the records in Egypt as well as the evidence from the Palestine plains, 1200 just seems to work better than any earlier date.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Suppose Velikovsky did contend what you say.Suppose he was wrong (I said suppose)If a scientist/researcher makes an error or a blunder should that "mistake" negate EVERYTHING else he argues ?If yes, then this criteria will eliminate every scientist/researcher who has ever lived - especially quantum mechanic scientists.

"as might be expected, the Mycenaean pottery of Hazor XIV is still Mycenaean IIIa. In the next level, Hazor XIII, we have Mycenaean IIIb.
Consequently, the city came to an end in the 13th century.Hence the Canaanite kingdom of Hazor which Barak fought against should be the city of Hazor XIII."source: Cambridge Ancient History/Chronology; page 68 [1962]Hi Brian:If true, then this dating of Judges requires a 15th century Exodus ?