Egyptology Sets Up A Straw Man

Ray, getting closer and closer to Witching Hour and I'm still waiting for explanations for the questions raised in Message 10

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Mangy,Since Ray isn't going to tell you, I'll take mercy on you and fill you in.Egypt was destroyed just as it said but Jehovah had taken all their sense from them and so they just never noticed!And if it hadn't been recorded in the Bible no one else would have noticed. You can thank Moses for writing that book because admit it, without reading Exodus, you wouldn't have a clue either!lfen

I could not agree anymore. Agreed.I would add that "weakened", if anything, is a gross understatement. Absolutely.This is why Egypt disappears from the Biblical record during the Judges interval (350 + years). Either the Jews were extremely smart by keeping to their story (liars) or they reported history just the way it happened. We know parallel - after the fact anti-Semites have shadowed and showered the Jews with endless conspiracy theories (JEPD). These charges are wholly fabricated since such an endeavor over the centuries is impossible. The real motive is anti-Biblical worldview needs. How could Egypt win anything since they were destroyed ?Israel and God left them with their wrists tied to their ankles. Ancient history is a giant puzzle. This is ONE of the reasons why the Bible was written: to preserve facts from God's objective perspective since the sands of time via weather and environment are not kind in preserving data. Evolutionists would surely agree since hominid fossils are extremely rare.The facts of history show Egypt to suddenly disappear after the events in question.Opponents ignore the fact that New Kingdom Pharoahs did NOT live in conventional New Kingdom time frame. They lived almost 600 years later. This means WE both agree who the major players are in the Amarna Tablets and disagree when these persons lived.If I am right (and I know that I am) then Amarna being dated circa 9th century BC means there is NOW no reason to resist a mid-15th century Exodus date: the Biblical date.Rayedit: spelling only.This message has been edited by Herepton, 01-12-2006 08:13 PM

Agreed. Agreed.Preservation is the next issue. Cutting through the chase - we must conclude based upon what we have. Do you agree ? But your conclusion is based upon conventional chronology with all of its errors.Jar's conclusion: Facts of history that I can prove:Thutmose III = Shishak: contemporary with Rehoboam.Queen Hatshepsut = Queen of Sheba: contemporary with Solomon.I would like EvC to open a general archaeology topic so we can decide this issue as time and busy schedules permit.Recent history shows minimalists run and hide at this point.Ray

More like laugh and roll on the floor, Ray.But propose a PNT. You know how that's done.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

What I said was that EvC should create an archaeological/historical topic where the principles could debate Amarna and related. The reason is because most persons (like Brian and myself) cannot commit to such a topic as author due to our schedules. If EvC creates the topic then this takes the pressure off of one person versus a gang. Debaters can proceed as time allows.Other boards do this, that is foster debate. Just order one of the do-nothing Admins who have no interest in the subject to create the topic after you supply the parameters and resolve ?Ray

Hi Ray, They are official correspondence, although they are private letters.You just need to read the headers to see it is official, they follow a prescribed formula. At least he was able to get one thing correct! The date is not abandoned, hardly anyone subscribes to this fantasy at all. We had oddball Velikovsky, now we have David Rohl, who readily admits that he’s running with Velikovsky’s original hypothesis, and we have you! That’s about it I’m afraid. The only thing that is overwhelming is the fact that you don’t know that this argument has been shown to be false, it doesn’t have a grain of credibility at all. What was Mesha’s victory stele celebrating? Why would anyone want to erect a stele to record a defeat? The biggest strawman you have set up is claiming that Egyptologists reject the Exodus because there are no recorded defeats; you haven’t supplied the name of a single scholar who takes this stance! All we have is your word that this argument exists, I asked you before about this. Who are the scholars that reject the Exodus solely on the fact that Egypt didn’t record the defeat by the Hebrews? Some have been recorded, even unofficially it is still a record of a defeat. Why did non-Egyptian nations not record this staggering defeat? As I said, we don’t have any references to say that they actually do claim this. Because the plagues and the Exodus are fictional tales. Yet the archaeological record overwhelming obliterates this date.
If, and I repeat if, there was an Exodus and Conquest of some sort, then it HAD to be 13th century BCE. But, as the mountainsof evidence available testifies, the Bible narratives of the Exodus and Conquest can be dismissed as unhistorical. Why would they? Why are you expecting them to comment on events that simply didn’t happen? No, the answer is that there were no plagues or Exodus, this is why they aren’t mentioned.Do you really place the Amarna period long after the reign of David? This really doesn’t make sense when you consider the geographical picture painted by the Amarna Letters suggests a different picture from 9th c Palestine. So, you apply different standards to other nations? How do you know other nations followed the same example?One point you seem to overlook is the FACT that the Bible is not a contemporary record, it is not a primary source for their being a David or any victory associated with him. Allied to this is that there is no external confirmation that David had a kingdom at all, or is there any evidence of a single victory of his. It is hardly reliable though. Accounts written hundreds of years after the events it contains. The Hyksos were foreigners who came to rule over Egypt, how did they come to rule? I am sure you acknowledged somewhere that the Hyksos defeated the Egyptians. These are surrounding nations recording victories, not Israel recording defeats (unless I missed something), they are also after the time you allot to David. So, outside of the Bible, you have no evidence at all?BrianThis message has been edited by AdminJar, 01-16-2006 02:41 PM

Hi J, As you are aware, throughout my studies I have come to know quite a few of the leading so-called minimalists, as well as having studied directly under three of them, I have had the pleasure of socialising with a few others.I have mentioned Rohl's (and Velikovsky's)manipulation of Egyptian chronology to two very well known 'minimalists, and they both initially did laugh, well, more of a titter than a guffaw.But, after the initial chuckle, they both said there is a more serious side to this, they both think Rohl is in it for the money and they are both concerned that he is profiting from people's desperation to have anything in the Bible validated. There is also concern that this 'flight of fancy' has undone a great deal of work that dedicated scholars from both sides of the fence have done in the last two hundred years.Everyone I have spoken to who is involved in the debate agree that Rohl's work is not of a critical academic study, even Kenneth Kitchen laughs at it.The alleged 'new chronology' is simply a money making gimmick, it has been falsified many times.Brian.

Hi Ray, Here is an old topic that may be just serve the purpose well.Brian.

I believe that is the case. The Gene Scotts, Pat Robertsons, Jerry Falwells, Kent Hovinds, Ron Wyatts and such are in it for the money they can get the gullible to part with. They are simply con-men, and yes, they do do great harm to legitimate scholarship in the process. They live on the desperation of those with weak faith.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Now lets not be too nasty to Rohl. He wasn't as bad as any of those you list. Whatever he is now (and I don't claim to know the answer to that one !), he used to be a maverick rather than a crank. He may only continue plugging his idea for the money now, but they were a legitimate attempt to reinterpret Egyptian history when he started - it just didn't work out. Nothing like Wyatt's silliness or Scott's Pyramidology either of which are laughable even compared to Rohl..

Darwinian ad hom rage = inability to refute.Who is preaching the gospel ?Whoever is being slandered.--Lloyd Jones.

http://www.hshideaway.com/chap15.htm#topAges in ChaosAges in ChaosThere is nowhere for deniers to go.Darwinists take obscure fossil scraps and assert them transitional, yet we have clear physical evidence of Temple treasures engraved at Karnak.Let the evasions begin.Ray

And where is that evidence? So far all you've produced are unsupported assertions and these most recent assertions have absolutely NOTHING to do with the Exodus.Plus I'm still waiting for answers to the questions posed in Message 10.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well,If the 'deniers' have no place to go, then these articles can be put in a peer reviewed archelogical magazine. I see a bunch of heiroglyphics on the wall, I don't have the ability to read them. Anybody can put photos on the wall, and insist they mean Moses was there. However, that is appealing to the public directly, rather than going through a peer reviewed process.If the evidence is as remarkable as you claim, where is the peer reviewed archelogical paper on it? I mean , without that peer review, you can have all sorts of religiously motivated, but mistaken claims.