Egyptology Sets Up A Straw Man

I noticed every opponent evaded every point you made.Why ?Inability to refute.Its the Darwinian way: confuse, play stupid, misrepresent, erect straw men.Why ?Inability to refute.ALL MY BIBLICAL claims are cited, yet opponents evade.For every scripture anyone can produce about a loving God I can produce 2 that records the opposite.Brian is right. God is a tyrant. But if you bow to Him the way He says to bow then you will discover incomprehensible love.Ray

i wish i had thought out my posts a bit better myself the problem is doctor scott follows some nonsensical beliefs, such as the junk about ireland, sorry but ireland has no realation to isreal, except maybe the same basis that all most all societies have, namely the spread of languages from africa through the middle east to europe, and trading between them.
as for ray, he ends up attacking people so much the admins don't bother anymore because he just seems to meltdown way to fast into insults well sometimes he does drop things, mostly because he doesn't know enough about the subject, which is a normal course, but others..
i'm not sure but one of the gp threads in free for all - http://EvC Forum: PROOF OF GOD -->EvC Forum: PROOF OF GODhe says asgara is right that the gp isn't in the center of egypt i believe then a few pages later he starts saying it is again, even though he agreed it wasn't, i'm not sure which posts it was its hard to argee with someone who uses people on the fringe, and people whos expertese lies not in the subject at hand - amatures that use the information to push beliefs rather than constuct the pastThis message has been edited by ReverendDG, 01-23-2006 04:59 AM

being that the topic is about extrabiblical things, the claims from the bible are secondary yes so?, then you can't claim hes all good, can you? what kind of love is that? the love of a monster then? this is pretty OT but i was bored, but back to the main topic!,so ray can we get some better pictures of the wall of the temple in egypt other than pictures that we have to squint at to see the lines?
as i was looking up information on david/solomon
i found this site - King Solomon - The Gospel According to Egypt
it explains that if solomon truely ruled the vast empire david conqered there would be some indication that the people around him celebrated it - but it shows that Amenhotep III did have this found evidence that he ruled most of the middle eat

Thats what happens when the bas-reliefs at Karnak produced by Thutmose III in the 9th century BC shows up.Brian:Where is that evidence showing a heathen victory during the reign of David ?your friend,Ray

Can I refer you to message 188:Uni is back on Feb 8th, if I have time before that I'll pop in and have a look around and get back to you. See you at the weekend.Brian.

In response to point #4:I think the answer to why no archaeological evidence has been found supporting the Exodus is that it's being searched for in the wrong place....or time rather.According to biblical chronology, the Exodus occurred around 1446 BC. Following traditional Egyption chronology this would put the Exodus smack in the middle of the 18th dynasty (1550 to 1320 BC). If we use these assumptions as our basis of search, we find no evidence of the plagues, the destruction of the Egyptian army or even the invasion of Palestine under Joshua.I believe the solution would be a revising of the standard Egyptian chronology, reducing the standard timeline by centuries and placing the events of the Exodus within the 12th dynasty. When this is done there is ample supporting evidence for each of the mentioned events.Before anyone responds with what is assuredly running through many people's minds...I'm not entirely looney. There are, in fact, a number of scholars who claim that a gross error in chronology has been made in calculating the dates of Egyptian history and that they should be reduced by centuries. (James, P. et al., Centuries of Darkness: A Challenge to the Conventional Chronology of the Old World Archaeology, Rutgers University Press, p. 318, 1991; Rohl, D., A Test of Time, Century Ltd, London, p. 143, 1995.)During the 12th dynasty, semetic slaves did indeed toil under the Egyptians and were even involved in the building of the 12th dynasty pyramids. Sir Flinders Petrie excavated the city of Kahun in the Faiyyum and Dr Rosalie David wrote a book about his excavations in which she said,”It is apparent that the Asiatics were present in the town in some numbers, and this may have reflected the situation elsewhere in Egypt . . Their exact homeland in Syria or Palestine cannot be determined . . The reason for their presence in Egypt remains unclear.’Because the area they were excavating was dated to the 12th dynasty, and they held to the traditional belief that the Exodus happened during the 15th dynasty, they were unable to properly indentify these peoples as the Israelites.There was another interesting discovery Petrie made. ”Larger wooden boxes, probably used originally to store clothing and other possessions, were discovered underneath the floors of many houses at Kahun. They contained babies, sometimes buried two or three to a box, and aged only a few months at death.’ In case it isn't obvious, the biblical explanation for this otherwise baffling discovery can be found in Exodus1:16:When you do the duties of a midwife for the Hebrew women, and see them on the birth stools, if it is a son, then you shall kill him’ (Exodus1:16).Another striking feature of Petrie’s discoveries was the fact that these slaves suddenly disappeared off the scene. Rosalie David wrote:”It is apparent that the completion of the king’s pyramid was not the reason why Kahun’s inhabitants eventually deserted the town, abandoning their tools and other possessions in the shops and houses.’”There are different opinions of how this first period of occupation at Kahun drew to a close ... . The quantity, range and type of articles of everyday use which were left behind in the houses may indeed suggest that the departure was sudden and unpremeditated.'When looking in the correct time period, the evidence for these events certainly exists.I know this is an extremely long post already, I'll quickly address the plaques. I agree with the inference that these events would have been so catastrophic (physically, economically and socially) that there would almost certainly be some evidence.In the Leiden Museum in Holland is a papyrus written in a later period, but most scholars recognize it as being a copy of a papyrus from an earlier dynasty. It could have been from the 13th dynasty describing the conditions that prevailed after the plagues had struck. It reads,”Nay, but the heart is violent. Plague stalks through the land and blood is everywhere . . Nay, but the river is blood. Does a man drink from it? As a human he rejects it. He thirsts for water . . Nay, but gates, columns and walls are consumed with fire . . Nay but men are few. He that lays his brother in the ground is everywhere . . Nay but the son of the high-born man is no longer to be recognized . . The stranger people from outside are come into Egypt . . Nay, but corn has perished everywhere. People are stripped of clothing, perfume and oil. Everyone says "there is no more". The storehouse is bare . . It has come to this. The king has been taken away by poor men.’ (Erman, A., Ipuwer Papyrus, Leiden Museum, quoted from The Ancient Egyptians, a source book of their writings, Harper and Row, New York, pp. 94”101, 1966.)In addition, a period of instability followed the demise of the 12th dynasty. Fourteen kings followed each other in rapid succession, the earlier ones probably ruling in the Delta before the 12th dynasty ended. Kings of the 13th dynasty had already started to rule in the north-east delta and, when the 12th dynasty came to an end, they filled the vacuum and took over as the 13th dynasty.So when the timelines of Egypt and the Old Testament are brought into agreement, we do see the evidence right "when" it should be. It shouldn't be surprising either that these timelines are incongruent. There obviously couldn't have been an Egyption dynasty or pyramid around at the time of the flood, although the standard Egyptian chronolgy would say that there was.Later

Rohl's chrnonology has been discussed elsewhere. It has serious problems in dealing with Assyrian history and the main evidences Rohl uses can be adequately explained within the conventional framework.In reading about Kahun some questions are raised. The Hebrews were supposedly enslaved, yet according to this page there is evidence that workers at Kahun went on strike
Kahun, Middle Kingdom WorkersOther reports indicate that there were numerous foreigners in the town, including Europeans and Hittites. So interpeting the abandonment of the town simply as the inhabitants heading off as the Exodus is hardly adequate.Petrie reports that the buried babies were often "some months old", and not newborns as the Bible would have us believe, if the children were Israelite. I see no evidence in Petries reports that the burials of babies were associated with foreigners or that their parents were impoverished or slaves.Petrie also reports finding pits within houses at Medinet Gurob, where personal posessions had been placed, burnt and buried. But this - although similar to the reports of buried babies - is associated with Europeans, not Asiatics by Petrie.(Petries reports may be found here http://www.kahun.man.ac.uk/excavations.htm )The Leiden Papyrus is also questionable as evidence. It is not known what period it refers to (my understanding is that it is usually taken as referring to the First Intermediate period). The Second Intermediate period is also dodgy as evidence since it is a period when Asiatics came to dominate Northern Egypt - including the Delta area where the Israelites were supposed to have been settled.Finally your reference the the Flood story is way outside of archaeology. Archaeology finds no sign of a worldwide Flood, local Flood stories don't include Egypt, and also even remians of pre-Dynastic Egypt, significantly predating the Pyramids of Gizeh.e.g http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/predns.htm )

Even though the evidence demands this sensible realignment - it will never be accepted. The acceptance would overturn the assertions of Egyptology for the last 100 years or so, who have, simply assumed the Bible is wrong and their interpretation of Manetho is correct.It will never be done because that would be tantamount to saying a miracle took place, then we would be obliged to stop being atheists.We have all the evidence we need of a c.1410 BC Conquest. Minimalists intentionally misdate this evidence to the 13th century. 200 years is all this is about.Since 1952 no scholar has ever answered Velikovsky:http://EvC Forum: Egyptology Sets Up A Straw Man -->EvC Forum: Egyptology Sets Up A Straw ManThutmose III did not live in the 15th century BC, but in the 9th. Karnak cannot lie, the physical evidence proves he was Shishak.Therefore, New Kingdom Pharoah's did not live in NK timeframe: Velikovsky's 600 year reconstruction is a fact.Dr. Scott: "Velikovsky is hated because he refuted them all."Ray

When one copy/pastes work, it usually considered good form to cite your source and make it clear where you copied it from. I don't think that adding your own casual tone and tailoring it slightly to the thread counts as fair use.So, unless you really are David Downs, you might want to edit your post citing your post as being his work.Oh yeah, and welcome to EvC! I hope you'll stick around and make yourself at home

How would changing the dates explain the lack of evidence for the exodus.Whenever it happened there should be something to show for it.

What I find most humorous about this whole concept is the way it demonstrates the ways conflicts are resolved by different people.Comparing well dated, cross-referenced and consistent {historical\archaeolobgical} evidence to a hypothetical interpretation of a book that makes vague references to events in the past, and noting that there are severe inconsistencies, there are two reactions:(1) Rational: the hypothetical interpretation of a certain time-line based on these vague references is wrong.(2) Irrational: everything else is wrong. It's much more than assertions Ray, it is evidence based on scientific investigations.The logical conclusion would not be that the bible per se is wrong, Ray, but that the hypothetical interpretation of it that developed dates for the {plagues\exodus\etc}, and which is what is really in conflict with the evidence, is what is wrong.It's called a falsified hypothesis.

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

heres a question for everyone i've been wondering about, if we changed the times that events accured wouldn't it change everything else?, such as the rise of rome, the fall of greece and the invasions of different places?
if we know that things accured at a certian time why would we change something else that might effect other things?
that is the reason i think historians will not change the time period of egypt, it would alter things we know happend
just as a joke if we change times would we be in 1900 ad or 2200 ad if they changed the times back then?

Mod is absolutely correct. I stand with him.Ray

I have added the caps. The "book" RAZD is talking about is the Bible.RAZD has just proved my initial point above, that is his blue box insults the premier source of ancient history, which is nothing but an ASSUMPTION that it is wrong.There you have the total "evidence" against the Bible: assumptions of wrongness. Any objective person knows the histories of Israel, Egypt, Babylonia, and Assyria are only made compatible when Egyptian is corrected. It was atheist Egyptologists who asserted Egypt as what it is while ignoring/assuming Bible wrong for personal worldview reasons.Anyone who studies the puzzle comes to the same conclusion: Egyptian was intentionally crafted to make Biblical appear false. Could one expect atheists to do anything else ?Velikovsky was an atheist. He proved the Bible right and was Talibanized, which proves it was all about personal hatred of the Bible and its Deity all along.The Exodus is the most massively proven ancient history event next to the Flood. It all is denied lest the Genesis Creator is seen as real and then the atheist worldview concomitantly viewed as falsified.Ray

This line needed preservation. I'll leave now.