Egyptology Sets Up A Straw Man

Hi Ray,I have a few questions, as you probably expected, but before I go any further, can you just tell me if I am on the right track or not?You argue that Egyptologists know that Egyptians have a tradition of not recording defeats.These same Egyptologists would thus know that the defeat of Egypt at the Sea of Reeds would not be recorded.They then go on to say that there was no Exodus because there are no records of an Egyptian defeat at the Sea of Reeds?I think that's pretty much what you are saying.If it is then can you answer the following questions please?1. Can you give me the name of an Egyptologist and a reference to where that Egyptologist rejects the authenticity of the exouds based solely on the lack of a written record of defeat?2. Can you explain why many Christian archaeologists (e.g. William Albright, George Wright, Joseph Calloway) claim that the Exodus did not happen as portrayed in the Hebrew Bible?Two questions are fine for now.Once you can give me an Egyptologist and a reference to where I can find such a claim I will check out that source and get back to you.Have a nice day.Brian.

Probably the latter!!

Your post is spot on.No one discards the Exodus based on the nonrecording of a defeat.The thing is about a defeat such as the Bible claims actually does leave a record, it doesn't have to be a written one.This suggestion also presupposes that Egyptologists are idiots and that the people who review their work before publication are idiots.But, I am extremely interested to see which Egyptologists reject the Exodus based SOLELY on the lack of a recorded defeat.If WT does produce a few Egyptologists who do claim what he says they do, then these Egyptologists HAVE set up a strawman. But until we get references we cannot conclude anything regarding WT's claim.Brian.This message has been edited by Brian, 05-18-2005 02:29 PM

Egyptology is a discipline and cannot put any questions, it is Egyptologist who use Egyptology to set questions. Well since a rhetorical question requires no answer, then what is the problem? There’s no record of Israelites even being there in the first place either, but explicit mentions in surviving records is not the sole source of information. You must know that a defeat of the entire armies of Egypt would have wider implications in the Ancient Near East. Especially when the Bible puts the Exodus bang in the middle of the greatest pharaoh who ever lived, a pharaoh that we have a great deal of information about.But you have the argument the wrong way around. Absence of a record of defeat claimed in a book written centuries after the event doesn’t mean that the Exodus happened. What you are required to do is to provide enough evidence to make that suggestion plausible. You would have to present evidence that there were Israelites there in the first place to inflict the defeat. You would have to provide evidence of a massive migration of people out of Egypt and into the harsh wilderness. It is a far more complex subject than most people think. Well, I gave you an example in the original thread. The Moabite Stone records a defeat. Well, I must admit, I haven’t read a single scholar involved in the debate who proposes this, and even if there were they would have to offer far more than that to disprove the story. I’ll save you time, there aren’t any. But, isn’t this the whole point?"Egyptology rejects the Exodus because there is no mention of a defeat by the Israelites, thus there was no Exodus." However, no one rejects the Exodus based solely on this ‘strawman’, therefore the argument is invalid.If someone were to offer this argument to me I would say fine, there is no written record of a defeat by Israel in written records, but what about everything else in the narrative, the lack of a mention of a defeat is just that, it doesn’t mean that they wouldn’t record other factors of the enslavement.The Exodus cannot be rejected on this one flawed approach. I won’t be online on Friday at all, so I’ll reply Saturday, if you have had time to respond.Brian.

Albright, William F From the Stone Age to Christianity: Monotheism and the Historical Process , John Hopkins Press, Baltimore 1946, page 194." Even the long contested date of the Exodus can now be fixed within reasonable limits. In 1937 the discovery in the remains of the latest Canaanite Lachish of a heiratic inscription dated to the year 1231 BC (or possibly somewhat later, but in no case earlier) proved that the fall of this town into Israelite hands took place in or after that year. Moreover, the long known, but often misinterpreted, text of the Israelite Stele of Marniptah, which is dated to 1229 BC, proves that Israel was already in Western Palestine in force, but had not yet settled down (the name is written with the determinative for "foreign people" instead of "foreign land"). If we allow the generation (forty years) which Israelite tradition demands, we thus arrive at a date not later than cir. 1260 for the Exodus."Albright allows some time for the Israelites to migrate from east to west Palestine, and concludes that 1290 BC "can hardly be far wrong". (p.195)If you require any more quotes let me know, this is the first one that came to hand, if it isnt sufficient then I would be happy to provide a few more.Brian.

No, I am pointing out a fact. The data from Egyptology is mute, all interpretation is a construct of the human mind, all history is a construct of the human mind, thus Egyptologists HAVE to be the subject and not the discipline. Egyptologists study Egyptology, but Egyptology only provides the data, the interpretation of that data is done by Egyptologists. In your scenario it is Egyptologists who present this strawman from Egyptology, but the discipline itself cannot talk. Tell you what, what about if I post the names and references from Egyptologists who believe that there was an Exodus, will you post an equal amount of Egyptologists who explicity state you ‘strawman?
Off the top of my head I can present three Egyptologists who believe that there was an Exodus. Kenneth Kitchen Emeritus Professor of Egyptology and Honorary Research Fellow at the School of Archaeology, Classics and Oriental Studies, Liverpool University.From Kitchen. K. A. Ancient Orient and Old Testament Tyndale Press, London 1966. pp. 57-58 First, Exodus 1:11 links the oppression of the Israelites with the building of the store-cities of Pithom and Rameses, giving thereby an indication of date for the end of the oppression and for the Exodus. Ra’amses is most probably the Pi-Rameses of Egyptian texts, founded by Sethos I and mainly built (and named) by Ramesses II. The Exodus, therefore, is best dated after the ascension of Ramesses II (1304 or 1290 BC). Then we have James K Hoffmeier Dr. Hoffmeier, who was born in Egypt and lived there until age 16, returns often for research and excavation. In 1975-77 he worked with the Akhenaten Temple Project in Luxor. He served from 1980-99 as Professor of Archaeology and Old Testament at Wheaton College, and was chairman of Wheaton's Department of Biblical, Theological, Religious and Archaeological Studies from 1992-98.He wrote a book that is often presented by fundies Israel in Egypt: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus TraditionThe name itself surely tells you that he believes there was an Exodus, but if you want quotes let me know.One more for good measure?David RohlFrom the inner age of the book A Test of Time: Volume One The Bible from Myth to History Arrow Books, London 1995. David took his degree in Egyptology and Ancient History at University College, London, between 1987 and 1990, where he is currently completing a doctoral thesis. From the same book page 283: In terms of the overall historical picture developed in this book the biblical episode detailing the life of Moses and the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt once again appear to slot neatly into place within the new chronological framework.

​

I am not the first person to suggest an Exodus date in the late 13th Dynasty. In the 1950’s Immanuel Velikovsky, in his book Ages in Chaos, proposed such a scheme.There we have three Egyptologists, and all believe in an Exodus from Egypt, can you present three Egyptologists who use this ‘strawman’ that you believe has been set up? Well, to be fair, we have yet to see evidence of this, all we have so far is your word, which I am sure is honourable, but in this instance we need something on top of that. Well, how many records of Near eastern Nations recording defeats would you need to admit that this theory is incorrect?Would eight records be enough?The following records are all taken from the Tell el-Amarna archives, dated from 1400-1350 BCE. I obviously couldn’t type out all of the texts, but if there are any specific references that you would like the full text for then let me know.Translations are from the book The Tell-el-Amarna-Letters , Berlin : Reuther & Reichard, 1896.EA 126 Sihlali-Sumur (from Irkata?) And behold,, I (?) have been driven. out of Irkata and (am?) in Simyra, and I have not the people who are at the palace. EA 134 The Prince of Hazi The Habiri are hostile to me, and are taking possession of the cities of my lord, the king, my god, my sun. For the Habiri have taken Mahziti, the city of my lord, the king, and have plundered it, and have given it over to the fire. And the habiri have occupied the city of Sigata. EA 137 A Syrian Prince to the King Abd-asirti has marched against me and behold, he has beaten my people and. EA 138 Akizza of Katna My lord, Azira has carried off the people of Katna, my servants although they all belong to my lord’s country. EA 146 Zimrida of Sidon O my lord I am your servant, and Namiawaza has made me evil in your eyes, O my lord. And while making me evil in your eyes, he has been occupying the whole territory of my father in the land of Kades, and my towns, he has given over to fire. EA 147 Zimrida of Sidon And let my lord, the king, know that the hostility against me is very powerful, all my cities, which the king gave into my hand, have fallen into the hands of the Habiri EA 162 Lapaja Since I have fallen (?) ? ? ? my two cities have been taken.EA 165 Suwardata Let the lord, the king, know that Abd-hiba has taken my city from me..

​

Further, lapaja is dead, he who took our cities and, verily, lapaja was allied with(?) Abd-hiba and (the tow of them) robbed our cities. I got bored typing out after eight, but these are enough records to negate your claim. If you want more records I can type out more for you. The biblical record is not a primary source, and anyway, this is circular reasoning. Do we?Apart from the fact that this, by your chronology, would be over 500 years after the Exodus, how does this support your argument that there were Hebrews in Egypt for 430 years before the Exodus? References please, and relevance. Well, I am planning on just working my way through your opening claims and dealing with them one at a time. So, can we keep this Thutmosis claim until we arrive at it?Before we move on, are you happy to drop the claim that no near eastern nations record defeats?Are you going to post the names and references of some Egyptologists who offer up your ‘strawman’? If not, do you concede this point too?Once we have arrived at a conclusion for these two points, we can move on.Brian.

While I have Hoffmeier's book open anyway, he claims that: The second toponym in Exodus 1:11 is unquestionably the Hebrew writing for Egyptian p(r) itm: House or domain (i.e. estate) of the God Atum. According to whom? Evidence please?You have this habit of making bold unsupported statements without the slightest hint of any support.For example, you made very bold claims on another thread that were similarly unsuported, is there any chance that you could reply to the unanswered questions at this reply. I was assuming that since you are hoping to do a preliminary report that you would be familiar with the material surrounding the debate, but I have yet to see anything of substance.This message has been edited by Brian, 05-21-2005 03:58 AM

No, it is completley untrue. In a book written by someone who knows next to nothing about Ancient Near Eastern history. Yes, its a gimmick to sell books.Stay tuned! it is bound to get more absurd LOLBrian

According to your chronology, the Judges would be from around 1400-1050-ish BCE.This 'no' mention' that you talk about only exists in the Old testament, because external to the Bible, there are literally thousands of mentions of Egypt and Egyptians in external sources.While we are on the subject of not mentioning defeats, why does the Bible fail to record the most humiliating, totla and comprehensive defeat that the Israelites ever suffered?You must have heard of the Merneptah Stele, also know as the 'Israel Stele'.In this stele (c.1207 BCE), it is recorded that Pharaoh Merneptah completely wiped out all of the Israelites: "Israel is desolated, his seed is not;
Palestine is become a widow for Egypt." Why does the Bible fail to record this defeat?I also reckon that this falsifies your other claim that Egypt was destroyed before the Judges period.Brian.This message has been edited by Brian, 05-21-2005 07:25 AM

Minimalist in regard to the Bible or to Egyptology? Okay, we have two names, do we have references to where I can find where they claim this ‘strawman’? But, this is untrue as well, you have acknowledged the references to the Hyksos in Egyptian records. They don’t normally record defeats, that’s a given, I have no argument about that. I will agree that *if* an Egyptologist rejects the Exodus simply because there is no mention of a defeat by the Israelites, then that is a strawman. Emphasis on the *if* Ray. I have heard it many times yes, but, hand on heart, I know of no one who rejects the exodus based solely on this issue. They don’t have to be deduced they are quite explicit. But, you are moving the goalposts here Ray! You asked where ANY Near Eastern nation records a defeat, and then I post 8 instances, but now you are rejecting them because they are private communications! It doesn’t matter what they are, you asked for "ANY" record, and these are without a shadow of a doubt a record of past events. "Where are Near Eastern Defeats recorded?, well, in the Amarna letters, but then you changed the question because there is an answer, I cannot second guess what your question was really supposed to have meant. I have answered the question that you asked. I don't think anyone is expecting these kings to erect steles celebrating a defeat.While we are on the issue, where are all the official records of Israelite defeats? Where are the inscriptions by the Israelites that you demand from the kings of Egypt, Assyria and Babylon? They may be private letters but they DO record many defeats. Once again then, where are Israel’s inscriptions that record defeats?Please also keep in mind that the Bible is a secondary source, thus it is inferior to primary sources, such as the Merneptah Stele.I’m going into uni later, I will post regarding the defeats during David’s United Monarchy later today.Brian.ps, I think another exodus debate is inevitable

Which goes to show how wrong the Bible is because Egypt was active in Palestine all the way through you Judges period. The fact that the Bible fails to mention Egyptians in Palestine is because these Bible stories were invented a long after the time they were said to have happened. No, it is consistent with the fact that the Bible was not written to be an accurate reconstruction of history. You forget that outside of the Bible from the period of the Judges there are thousands of pieced of evidence to support Egyptian military action.How many records would you like regarding Egypt’s military action from your period of around 1400-1050 BCE (based on your 1453 Exodus date)?I am also interested in why you are taking a book that was written centuries, and in some cases almost a thousand years, after the the events it claimed happened, over the huge amount of contemorary records? How many would you accept as a reasonable number before you will admit that Egypt was very active during the alleged Judges period? It is the first mention of an ‘Israel’ as a nation, outside of the Bible. This is probably based on the FACT that the Bible is an extremely unreliable book for reconstructing history, and almost all of the primary history is contradicted by external evidence. You also have the added problem of the pro-bible crowd who have HAD to change their views in light of the overwhelming contrary evidence to many biblical tales. I thought you said that you hadn’t studied the issue?Is this evidence of one of the pro-Bible crown ASSUMMING the Bible correct from the get-go?Double standard Ray? I’m sure you will. But, why leave this defeat out, the ONLY reference outside of the Bible that mentions Israel (before Omri) in the entire extant evidence. The Bible fails to mention the one event that has contemporary evidence, this could mean that the other defeats are purely or partly fictional.Also, these recorded defeats are not official declarations. Brian.

Well, you claim that Near Eastern countries only record victories, you assume that these nations would record them, so where are Israel's contemporary record of victories? I am happy to start a new topic, once the format has been agreed upon. Well, I think if we narrow it down to two appoaches and try to keep everyone focussed it would work. I believe that the two choices would be either:1. An Exodus thread going through each individual claim until that one individual claim had been settled.or2. Have a general Exdodus thread with separate threads for each issue of the debate.I would prefer number one, with the first individual claim being centred on the evidence for 'Hebrews in Egypt'. Yes, me and every near eastern history department in the world. It was contained in the very first post of the original 'Dating the Exodus' thread.Off topic here of course.Brian.

HI Ray,I just got a few minutes, regarding the Egyptian military action in Palestine during the period of the Judges, how many pieces of evidence would be sufficient?Brian.

Hi Ramoss,Although it is likely to be a reference to the 'House of David', this is not the only possible translation of the Tel dan Stele.Also, it isnt direct evidence of David, it isn't even a Hebrew inscription.We had a short discussion HERE about the stele.Brian.

It appears that Ray has been terminated.You'll have to wait for those artefacts.Brian.