Egyptology Sets Up A Straw Man

If Egypt was admittedly destroyed prior to the 8th plague then how much more after the remainder ?Whats your point ? What is your evidence of an exaggeration ?To assert contrary to the verse/evidence ? The destruction of Pharoah's army invites further destruction of Egypt because there is no one to protect it.Admin:Where are you now ?RMEDIT:Ringo:Your input defies logic and if it aint intentional then you need to learn the basics before entering a debate.The Bible CLAIMS Egypt was destroyed by the Plagues and Red Sea drowning of its army.For you to contest these basic CLAIMS reveals how ignorant you are or even worse - deliberately spamming the debate with mindeless illogic as previously charged.You are like a baby who couldn't get his way so you obtained Admin help to validate your embarrassing ignorance.I will not suffer your moronic posts any longer.I will ignore you because your "points" and "questions" are now revealed to be platforms to make more ridiculous "points" and "questions" as is seen in your previous posts.In reality, you are enraged by the evidence and your inability to compete. Therefore you and Arach have secured biased help from an Admin "making" me reply to your nonsense.Have me banned - it is better than to placate your deliberate ignorance which is meant to ruin the debate.IOW, you are a moron asking little kid questions and an equally angry Admin is ignoring these facts for an ulterior reason of his own.Ray MartinezThis message has been edited by Ray Martinez, 05-21-2005 02:27 PMThis message has been edited by Ray Martinez, 05-21-2005 02:28 PMThis message has been edited by Ray Martinez, 05-21-2005 02:29 PM

The point is that Egypt was not destroyed. Pharoah's servants were hysterical. Exodus 10:7 is not the Bible saying that Egypt was destroyed. It's the Bible describing Pharoah's servants in a state of panic. If Egypt had been destroyed at that point, there would have been nothing left to destroy by the locusts, etc. Again, the army was not even destroyed yet when Pharoah's servants had their hissy-fit. How could they have been right about Egypt being "destroyed" if the army was intact?And how could destruction of the army "invite" further destruction if Egypt was already destroyed?The Bible agrees with outside historical sources. Egypt was not destroyed.

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

No. my major point is that Ahmose expelled the Hyksos. You move Ahmose, you move the Hyksos.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Are you give to give up on your date for the Hyksos expulsion
or your date for Tuthmosis III ?

---

What ever gave you this idea ?

---

The fact that Ahmose expelled the Hyksos. How often do I have to point that out ?

quote:

---

Your quote above assumes Thutmose III is a New Kingdom Pharoah. In conventional schemes the Velikovsky reconstruction places him and the entire corp of Eighteenth Dynasty Pharoah's AFTER the Nineteenth Dynasty.

---

The New Kingdom is Dynasties 18-20 so even if you could justify suhc a move Tuthmosis III would still be a New Kingdom Pharoah. But how can Velikovsky possible say that the Dynasty that reunited Egypt directly followed a Dynasty that ruled a united Egypt for the entire period ? And if you're tryign to seperate Ahmose form the Hyksos, how do you dela with the 9th Dynasty's ventures into Palestine ? Are you going to mave them to after Tuthmosis III ? - because your chronology allows no such action between the Exodus and Tuthmosis IIII it is about time that you laid out your chronology and provided evidence for the major variations.

Because I must respond or be banned:I concede the point. I agree with you. I agree with your unsupported grossly illogical opinion.Ray Martinez

Why must Ahmose and the Hyksos stay together ?You have no evidence Ahmose reigned during the 16th century.The evidence yet to be argued proves the New Kingdom Pharoahs did not reign in the New Kingdom timeframe. Where did I claim AHMOSE expelled the Hyksos ?I know conventional positions assert Ahmose expelled the Hyksos but Velikovsky has proven Ahmose wasn't even alive in the 16th century.I agreed the Hyksos were expelled in the New Kingdom and said I didn't know who the Pharoah was because Ahmose reigned about 600 years later. Its off-topic here.I am just giving you respect as a proven knowledgeable debater nontheless.Where does Egypt record defeats ?RM

I never stated that you claimed that Ahmose expelled the Hyksos. However you never directly disputed it, nor the evidence I provided.What is your explanation of Ahmose attacking the Hyksos capitol if he did not expel the Hyksos ?And if your chronology is off-topic here then your dating of the Hyksos expulsion is off-topic and your dating of Tuthmosis III is off-topic - because they are parts of your chronology. And we certainly have to forget your claim that Egypt took around 500 years to recover from the Exodus because you won't tell us where that fits into your version of Egyptian history.Oh well here's a simple question about your chronology:Did the attacks made by TUthmosis I into Palestine occur:
a) Before the Exodus
b) between the Exodus and Tuthmosis III
c) after Tuthmosis III

Ray, how can chronology be off-topic for a history thread? We shouldn't have to play twenty questions each time we try to fix an event, and we don't all have a copy of Ages in Chaos to refer to. Please put at least the highlights up so we're on the same page.This message has been edited by Dead Parrot, 05-22-2005 10:51 AM

Message 110Is the end of the LLM thread.As a small note: I was not asked to intervene here by anyone. I choose to because of the large number of complaints about you ignoring points that you need to deal with.

AdminNosy,I went back and read Ray's OP and I had forgotten what a tangled mess it was. Since I'm enjoying the humor of this thread immensely I'm not complaining but I am suggesting that in the future getting a tighter definition might be helpful.I've pulled out this statement from the sprawling mess Ray submitted as being the most likely candidate as his major premise: And several posters right off the bat correctly pointed out that this is non starter. For the sake of argument I'll assume that no one produces a claimed victory during David's reign. I'll even posit that there is a David and we know for certain when he reigned. However, I assert that a "lack of claimed victory" doesn't corroborate the scriptural record. Lack of evidence is not a corroboration.The logical failure is right there from the get go in Ray's faulty premise. But then he may say that wasn't his premise. This whole hilarious enterprise was hobbled from the outset. It's like the gates opened and the horse tried to take a step and fell over and now is just thrashing around trying to get up!just my proverbial 2 cents,
lfen

uh, excuse me, but i'm not ignorant. in fact, i'm not even feigning ignorance. you make a claim that the bible says something, and then fail to provide where.now, i've read exodus. quite carefully. and it never says that egypt as a whole was destroyed. in fact, if god DID destroy egypt, why is there today? why does it reappear later in the bible? the appearance in kings is not confirmation of your point, it's a rebuttal. god must not have done a very good job of destroying them.but i'm giving you the benefit of the doubt, and allowing for the fact that occasionally i forget things, or maybe i just missed something. so please do educate me,educate me as to what you base your claim on. you have rather consistently demonstrated poor knowledge of scripture. i will stand by and let you call me ignorant when you can read my signature.

---

אָרַח

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

One with case hardened goal posts set in concrete, I hope!lfen

First, I apologize to Admin Jar for a unbefitting emotional remark to him in another Forum.Arach: Your one-way street terms are unacceptable, but even if they were I want Admin Jar's approval to debate. He has ruled I am not "debate worthy".Brian: Your reply - ASAP, probably Monday. Thanks for your responses - they are challenging and the real reason I like this board.Ray Martinez

Ray: They also know Egypt does not record defeats as do you.Brian: They don’t normally record defeats, that’s a given, I have no argument about that.Ray: Then to ask the question as to where is the Plagues/Exodus in Egyptian sources is a straw man - right ?And I agree with you that no person rejects the Exodus narratives based solely on the lack of Egyptian sources mentioning it. You can technically cite this ad nauseum but it doesn't bother me in the slightest as registering Egypt recording defeats. The Hyksos ruled for approximately 300 years so this is not a defeat as meant by the OP intending lost battles or wars. We already agreed that this specific criteria cannot be met.I am only after the "OP question" being seen as a straw man in lieu of the fact that Near East nations do not record defeats. Fine - I won't labor the point again. I very well knew about Amarna prior to posting this topic but assumed this private correspondence would be understood to not be a nation recording a defeat unlike Israel.The fact that you resorted to Amarna confirms my OP suspicions about Near East defeats. Agreed.Then why would anyone in the know ask where the Plagues/Exodus is in Egyptian sources ?Of course I am logically assuming the Plagues/Exodus IF true is tantamount to a massive defeat.I will finish this reply - ASAP.Ray M.Edit:Correct Hyksos rule from 350 to 300 years.RMThis message has been edited by Ray Martinez, 05-22-2005 04:24 PM

I do not say you are unworthy of debate, only that you have not yet shown that you are capable of doing so.This thread is a golden opportunity for you. Please show I'm mistaken, it would make me very happy.